Alaska vs. Massachusetts
Federal sentencing comparison · FY2024 · Source: USSC
Guideline Compliance Breakdown
Alaska
9th CircuitMassachusetts
1st CircuitFull Metrics Comparison
| Metric | Alaska | Massachusetts | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avg Sentence (months) | 125.2 | 39.8 | Massachusetts |
| Total Cases | 311 | 109 | |
| Within Guidelines % | 1% | 6% | Massachusetts |
| Above Guidelines % | 0% | 7% | Alaska |
| Below Guidelines % | N/A | N/A | |
| Guilty Plea Rate | 54% | 91% | |
| Prison Sentence Rate | 97% | 75% | |
| Disparity vs. National | +11.0% | -44.8% | Massachusetts |
Top Offenses (FY2024)
What This Alaska vs. Massachusetts Comparison Reveals
In FY2024, the Alaska District (9th Circuit) handled 311 federal sentencings with an average imposed term of 125.2 months, while the Massachusetts District (1st Circuit) handled 109 cases at an average of 39.8 months. That is a 85.4-month gap — the Alaska District sentences longer on average. Case volume alone tells part of the story: Alaska processed roughly 2.9× more defendants than Massachusetts, which affects guideline compliance patterns and the mix of offenses each court sees.
Guideline compliance diverges as well. In Alaska, 1% of cases were sentenced within the guideline range, 0% above, and N/A% below, with Booker variances in N/A% of dispositions. In Massachusetts, the corresponding figures were 6% within, 7% above, N/A% below, and N/A% Booker variances. Guilty-plea rates ran at 54% vs. 91%, and prison-sentence rates at 97% vs. 75% respectively — metrics that capture both charging practice and judicial discretion across the two courts.
Set against the nationwide benchmark for the same offense mix, Alaska ran a disparity of +11.0% and Massachusetts ran -44.8%. That comparison adjusts for the offense mix each district actually handles, so it isolates court-level patterns from pure caseload composition. Readers should still treat these as aggregate descriptive statistics — individual cases turn on criminal history, specific guideline adjustments, cooperation agreements, and statutory mandatory minimums that the district averages cannot resolve. This data is presented for research and educational purposes only and is not legal advice.
About This Comparison
Source: United States Sentencing Commission (USSC), Individual Offender Datafiles, FY2015–FY2024. Percentages are calculated from the total sentenced cases for each district in FY2024. "Within guidelines" means the judge imposed a sentence within the prescribed guidelines range. "Booker variance" reflects sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) outside the guidelines range.
Source: USSC Commission Datafiles · How we compute these metrics
Related District Comparisons
Other sentencing comparisons involving these districts or their circuit peers.