Judge Paul D. Borman — Federal Sentencing Patterns

U.S. District Judge Paul D. Borman sits in the Eastern District of Michigan (EDMI) and granted a downward variance in 87 of 166 federal sentencings (52.4%) from FY2012–FY2024. This page shows aggregate sentencing patterns for Judge Paul D. Borman, including the most common reasons cited on the Statement of Reasons (SOR) for granting a downward variance.

Top reasons Judge Paul D. Borman grants downward variances

Reasons included across all guideline chapters (87 below-guideline cases out of 166 cases identified)

ReasonCasesAvg % Below Min
  1. 1.Criminal History Issues (aggregated reason)10-34.8%
  2. 2.(5H1.6) Family ties and responsibilities8-48.4%
  3. 3.Mental and Emotional Conditions (aggregated reason)7-48.0%
  4. 4.(5H1.1) Age (Defendant's youth or old age)5-44.8%
  5. 5.(5H1.5) Previous employment record5-40.9%
  6. 6.Mule/Role in the offense5-33.2%
  7. 7.Pursuant to a NONbinding (or unknown type) plea agreement4-39.7%
  8. 8.(5H1.4) Drug dependence and alcohol abuse4-27.7%
  9. 9.Lack of Youthful Guidance4-22.1%
  10. 10.Rehabilitation3-68.4%

Zone D sentencing variance — Judge Paul D. Borman

Imprisonment-only recommended sentencing zone (offense level 14+ at any criminal history). Of Judge Paul D. Borman's 116 Zone D sentencings, 70 (60.3%) fell below range.

Zone D · imprisonment recommended116 cases
  • Within range
    43(37.1%)
  • Below range
    70(60.3%)
    avg −30.3% below min
  • Above range
    3(2.6%)
    avg +23.7% above max

Need case-level analysis for Judge Paul D. Borman?

Want to see what those 87 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 Paul D. Borman's trial tax (sentences after trial vs. plea) and the average §5K1.1 cooperation discount.

EXPLORE JUST METRICS →