Leavenworth Prison Guard Sentenced for Smuggling Tobacco to Inmates

A former guard at the federal penitentiary in Leavenworth, Kansas, was sentenced to three years in prison for taking bribes from inmates. Marc Buckner had pled guilty to one count of a public official accepting bribes. Buckner started working for the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 1995.

Buckner smuggled tobacco and rolling papers into the prison, hidden in two handmade insoles in his shoes. Inmates paid him $750 for each can of tobacco and rolling papers. He did this about once or twice a month for years. The FBI arrested him in March 2014, when tobacco, rolling papers, and $1,521 in cash were found in the special insoles he had made.

People in federal prison are not allowed to have tobacco. The Bureau of Prisons banned it several years before this case.

What the Justice Department reported

Two announcements from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Kansas give the public record of the case.

On November 7, 2016, the office said Marc Buckner, then 47, of Kansas City, Kansas, pleaded guilty to one count of a public official accepting bribes. He admitted the conduct happened while he worked as a guard at the penitentiary in Leavenworth. Inmates paid him $750 for each can of Bugler tobacco and rolling papers. He hid them in two handmade insoles in his shoes and brought them in once or twice a month for years. The plea announcement said the count carried up to 15 years in prison.

On April 10, 2017, the same office said the court sentenced him to three years. The sentencing announcement repeats the $750 price, the brand, the insoles, and the pace of once or twice a month. It does not set out a guideline calculation, a loss figure, or the reasons the court chose three years. Those details are not in the press releases, so this page does not invent them.

The announcements are the plea and the sentencing.

How a bribery count is sentenced

Bribery of a public official is punished under 18 U.S.C. § 201(b). The statute authorizes a fine, or imprisonment of not more than 15 years, or both. That maximum matches the figure in the plea announcement. A separate crime, an illegal gratuity under § 201(c), has a maximum of two years. The announcements describe the count as accepting bribes, and the plea announcement states the 15-year maximum, which is the bribery figure.

The guideline for offering, giving, soliciting, or receiving a bribe is USSG §2C1.1. It sets a base offense level and then adds levels for facts such as more than one bribe and the value of the payments. Value is scored with a dollar table. The Commission adjusted many of those dollar steps for inflation in amendments that took effect November 1, 2026 (official text). Do not copy a 2017 dollar threshold into a hearing held under a later Manual.

At Buckner's sentencing in 2017, the court used the Manual then in effect, and the guidelines were already advisory. The judge still had to calculate the range correctly and then weigh the statutory factors. Our guide to how the guidelines work explains that sequence in current terms. A range from 2017 is not the range a court would calculate today without redoing the math under the Manual that applies on the new sentencing date. USSG §1B1.11 tells the court to use the Manual in effect on the day of sentencing, unless that would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. Peugh v. United States, 569 U.S. 530 (2013), requires the older Manual when the newer one produces a higher range.

The presentence report

In a public-corruption case, the presentence report is where the dollar figure, the number of payments, the person's job, and the criminal history are written down. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 requires the probation officer to report the guideline range and the history and characteristics of the person being sentenced. The report is disclosed at least 35 days before sentencing unless that time is waived. Written objections are due within 14 days. At least 7 days before the hearing, the court and the parties receive the final report and an addendum of unresolved objections.

This page does not have Buckner's report, and it does not guess what the officer wrote. The point for any similar case is that an unobjected value or an unobjected count of bribes becomes the range. Rule 32(i)(3) lets the court adopt undisputed facts as findings. Those findings can also follow the person into Bureau of Prisons custody, because the court's rulings are attached to the copy of the report the Bureau receives. The walk-through is our page on the presentence report.

Departures in 2017, variances now

In April 2017 the Manual still had a departure step between the range and the final sentence. A departure was a move outside the range for a reason the Manual listed. That is not how a federal sentencing works today.

Amendment 836, effective November 1, 2025, removed nearly all departures. USSG §1B1.1 is now two steps. The judge calculates the range. The judge then chooses a sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary. A sentence above or below the range is a variance. Facts that once supported a departure, including health, family circumstances, and years of otherwise lawful work, can still be argued as reasons for a variance. The Commission said removing departures does not limit what a court may consider.

One below-range provision stayed inside the Manual. On a government motion stating that the person gave substantial assistance, USSG §5K1.1 still allows a sentence below the range. The Manual no longer calls it a departure. See departures and variances.

Nothing in the 2017 announcements says whether the court departed, varied, or sentenced inside the range. Three years is the term imposed. It is not a formula you can reuse.

Appeal, a § 2255 motion, and compassionate release

A sentence can be reviewed, and the clocks are short.

A direct appeal of a sentence is authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3742. In a criminal case the defendant's notice of appeal is due within 14 days after the judgment is entered, under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(b). A plea agreement may waive that appeal. This post does not have the plea agreement or the docket, so it does not say whether an appeal was filed or waived in Buckner's case.

A motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 asks the sentencing court to vacate or correct the sentence. The ordinary deadline is one year from the date the conviction becomes final. Later starting dates exist only in the situations § 2255(f) lists. It is not a second chance to argue for a lower number on the same record.

Compassionate release is 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). The sentencing judge may reduce a term for extraordinary and compelling reasons after the person asks the warden and either exhausts the Bureau of Prisons process or waits 30 days from the warden's receipt of the request. A guideline amendment reduces an old sentence only when it is listed as retroactive in USSG §1B1.10(d), through a § 3582(c)(2) motion. Those are different motions. Our page on reducing a final sentence separates them.

If a sentencing hearing is still ahead

Buckner's hearing was in 2017. If yours, or a family member's, is still coming, the useful work happens before the day.

Read the presentence report against the discovery, and object in writing inside the 14 days. In a bribery case, the disputes are often the number of payments, the dollar value, and whether an increase for more than one bribe applies. Bring records that § 3553(a) can use: work history, medical records, and letters that state facts. At the hearing, Rule 32(i)(4) requires the court to let the defendant speak. Our pages on the sentencing hearing and allocution describe that part of the day. Ask for a variance under § 3553(a). Do not file a departure motion the Manual no longer contains.

This account is general information about a public federal case and about how federal sentencing works. It is not a prediction about any sentence.

Sources: U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Kansas, plea and sentencing announcements; cjonline.com.