Central Illinois vs. Eastern Wisconsin
Federal sentencing comparison · FY2024 · Source: USSC
Guideline Compliance Breakdown
Central Illinois
7th CircuitEastern Wisconsin
7th CircuitFull Metrics Comparison
| Metric | Central Illinois | Eastern Wisconsin | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avg Sentence (months) | 69.2 | 97.7 | Illinois |
| Total Cases | 549 | 539 | |
| Within Guidelines % | 3% | 4% | Wisconsin |
| Above Guidelines % | 4% | 2% | Wisconsin |
| Below Guidelines % | N/A | N/A | |
| Guilty Plea Rate | 90% | 89% | |
| Prison Sentence Rate | 90% | 95% | |
| Disparity vs. National | +15.2% | +10.0% | Wisconsin |
Top Offenses (FY2024)
What This Central Illinois vs. Eastern Wisconsin Comparison Reveals
In FY2024, the Central Illinois District (7th Circuit) handled 549 federal sentencings with an average imposed term of 69.2 months, while the Eastern Wisconsin District (7th Circuit) handled 539 cases at an average of 97.7 months. That is a 28.5-month gap — the Eastern District sentences longer on average. Case volume alone tells part of the story: Central processed roughly 1× more defendants than Eastern, which affects guideline compliance patterns and the mix of offenses each court sees.
Guideline compliance diverges as well. In Central Illinois, 3% of cases were sentenced within the guideline range, 4% above, and N/A% below, with Booker variances in N/A% of dispositions. In Eastern Wisconsin, the corresponding figures were 4% within, 2% above, N/A% below, and N/A% Booker variances. Guilty-plea rates ran at 90% vs. 89%, and prison-sentence rates at 90% vs. 95% respectively — metrics that capture both charging practice and judicial discretion across the two courts.
Set against the nationwide benchmark for the same offense mix, Central Illinois ran a disparity of +15.2% and Eastern Wisconsin ran +10.0%. 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.