Judge Joan N. Ericksen — Federal Sentencing Patterns

U.S. District Judge Joan N. Ericksen sits in the District of Minnesota (DMN) and granted a downward variance in 100 of 210 federal sentencings (47.6%) from FY2012–FY2025. This page shows aggregate sentencing patterns for Judge Joan N. Ericksen, including the most common reasons cited on the Statement of Reasons (SOR) for granting a downward variance.

Top reasons Judge Joan N. Ericksen grants downward variances

Reasons included across all guideline chapters (100 below-guideline cases out of 210 cases identified)

ReasonCasesAvg % Below Min
  1. 1.Criminal History Issues (aggregated reason)32-38.3%
  2. 2.(5H1.1) Age (Defendant's youth or old age)19-38.1%
  3. 3.(5H1.6) Family ties and responsibilities15-32.6%
  4. 4.Lack of Youthful Guidance12-34.6%
  5. 5.Reduce Disparity (aggregated reason)11-49.8%
  6. 6.Avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants11-37.7%
  7. 7.Rehabilitation11-25.5%
  8. 8.Mule/Role in the offense10-47.2%
  9. 9.Acceptance of responsibility9-52.7%
  10. 10.(5H1.5) Previous employment record8-29.3%

Zone D sentencing variance — Judge Joan N. Ericksen

Imprisonment-only recommended sentencing zone (offense level 14+ at any criminal history). Of Judge Joan N. Ericksen's 186 Zone D sentencings, 89 (47.8%) fell below range.

Zone D · imprisonment recommended186 cases
  • Within range
    88(47.3%)
  • Below range
    89(47.8%)
    avg −30.3% below min
  • Above range
    9(4.8%)
    avg +19.0% above max

Need case-level analysis for Judge Joan N. Ericksen?

Want to see what those 100 below-guideline cases actually looked like? Just Metrics shows you the actual matched cases — same judge, same guideline chapter, same guideline range — and tells you what they did.

Just Metrics also surfaces Judge Joan N. Ericksen's trial tax (sentences after trial vs. plea) and the average §5K1.1 cooperation discount.

EXPLORE JUST METRICS →