Congress intended to make the sentencing process less discretionary and more equitable when it passed the U.S. Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, and sentencing guidelines were devised to promote those changes. After more than a decade of implementation, however, little is known about the impact of the new policy. This paper examined sentences imposed between 1993 and 1994 in one Federal circuit in an effort to determine whether the U.S. Guidelines had achieved equity in processing. It looks beyond the guidelines methodology to the broader theory of rational criminal justice decision making. The paper used the theoretical model of a rational case processing system to guide the interpretation of findings and recommendations for improvements. Findings indicated that sentencing decisions were dictated in large part by relevant legal factors, but that demographic traits and personal circumstances did have a negative influence on case outcomes for some defendants. The paper concluded that the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines had not produced uniformity, consistency, and equity in sentencing. Tables, notes, references