More

New Crack Cocaine Sentencing Guidelines May Apply To Old Cases

Crack Cocaine Sentencing Guidelines

JESSICA GRESKO   05/31/11 07:22 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — A year ago, a drug dealer caught with 50 grams of crack cocaine faced a mandatory 10 years in federal prison. Today, new rules cut that to as little as five years, and thousands of inmates not covered by the change are saying their sentences should be reduced, too.

"Please make this situation fair to all of us," prisoner Shauna Barry-Scott wrote from West Virginia to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, which oversees federal sentencing guidelines. "Treat us the same."

The commission meets Wednesday in Washington to consider making the new crack sentencing guidelines retroactive, a step that could bring early release for as many as 1 in every 18 federal prisoners, or approximately 12,000 inmates.

The commission has already received more than 37,000 letters on the issue, most from inmates and their families and friends. Many of the letters are form letters drafted by interest groups such as Families Against Mandatory Minimums, but others contain personal pleas. A woman from New York wrote to say her nephew should be "given another chance at society." A mother from Illinois said her child was sentenced "very harshly."

Prisoners have also been writing judges and public defenders, asking if the new law might help them.

"Dear Judge Blake, I am forwarding this letter to you for your assistance that concerns the new crack cocaine law that was just passed," Steven Harris wrote to a federal judge in Maryland, asking about his 10-year sentence for crack possession and possession of a firearm during the crime. "I would like to know if this law will help me."

Congress and President Barack Obama agreed in August to reduce the minimum penalties for crack. But the law did not apply to prisoners who were locked up before the change.

Michael Nachmanoff, the lead public defender in the eastern district of Virginia, where about 1,000 prisoners would be affected, the most of any area in the country, says his office has been getting about a half-dozen calls or letters a month.

Nachmanoff, who will testify before the commission Wednesday, says his office is prepared to act if the commission makes changes. And he says anyone who worries that retroactivity would be going light on offenders is wrong.

"All of these people will wind up serving long sentences," he said. "This is really about fixing a really unfair problem that now everybody recognizes was wrong."

Since the 1990s, advocates have complained that crack offenders are treated more harshly than those arrested with powdered cocaine. Many critics view the disparity as racial discrimination because black drug offenders are more likely to be charged with federal crack offenses and to serve longer prison terms than other offenders.

The Fair Sentencing Act, signed by Obama in August, attempts to remedy that disparity by changing the amount of crack cocaine required to trigger five and 10-year mandatory sentences.

Before the law was passed, a person convicted of possessing 5 grams of crack cocaine – about the weight of five packets of Sweet'n Low – automatically got sentenced to five years. Now it takes 28 grams to trigger a five-year mandatory sentence, an amount more in line with powdered cocaine. Possessing 280 grams of crack triggers a 10-year sentence as opposed to the old standard of 50 grams – about the same weight as 10 nickels.

Inmates who received the mandatory minimum sentence under the old system will not be eligible for early release because only Congress can make mandatory minimum sentences retroactive. But inmates who received above the minimum could see their sentences reduced, and others whose offense did not rise to the level of a mandatory minimum could be eligible for earlier release, too.

The commission estimates that the average sentence reduction for applicable inmates would be approximately three years.

Not everyone supports the proposal for retroactivity. The Fraternal Order of Police opposed the law Obama signed and plans to oppose retroactivity before the commission, arguing criminals were aware of the penalties for their actions.

"They knew what they were doing. They went into it with their eyes open," Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents more than 300,000 law enforcement officers.

Prisoners charged with crack offenses have already had one recent experience with retroactive sentence reductions. In 2007, the commission revised the crack sentencing guidelines, reducing sentences by an average of two years. Approximately 16,000 offenders had their sentences reduced.

For the change to be made retroactive, four members of the six-member commission would have to vote to support the idea. If that happens, Congress could still reject or modify the guidelines until the end of October.

Given that the Fair Sentencing Act passed Congress almost unanimously and that the commission has acted previously to make sentencing changes retroactive, Marc Mauer of the Washington-based Sentencing Project said he is cautiously optimistic that the proposal for retroactivity will be adopted.

The commission is expected to rule in the next few months, but that ruling can't come soon enough for some prisoners.

"I love and miss my children very much," inmate Samuel Tirado wrote to the commission from his New Jersey penitentiary. "And I hope to be reunited with them sooner than 2022."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — A year ago, a drug dealer caught with 50 grams of crack cocaine faced a mandatory 10 years in federal prison. Today, new rules cut that to as little as five years, and thousands of ...
WASHINGTON — A year ago, a drug dealer caught with 50 grams of crack cocaine faced a mandatory 10 years in federal prison. Today, new rules cut that to as little as five years, and thousands of ...
Filed by Alexander Belenky  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 94
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
04:25 PM on 06/12/2011
As an African-American law enforcement officer I find it offensive that black civil rights organizations attack these guidelines as being racist. They have no idea (or maybe don't care) how much damage the crack epidemic did to black communities.
10:23 AM on 06/11/2011
Good black folks will be endangered when the released inmates return to their neighborhoods to wreak more havoc. Sad. More evidence that Dems do not in fact care about black people at all.
02:03 AM on 06/04/2011
I believe the media is helping to win the war on drugs - it is not cool at all to have those kind of problems, People are starting to realize it is a inside job or watching a movie is not all that bad.
http://www.yourtreatmentsolutions.com
03:03 PM on 06/01/2011
Good, this is a great idea. America's incarceration rate is ridiculously high in comparison to other countries and it costs us a fortune to house these people for so long.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
02:08 PM on 06/01/2011
Mandatory minimum sentences have their place. I would say that carrying around 50 grams is intent to sell, that much in your pocket is not for personal use. Here is a link to a picture of just what 50 grams of crack looks like. It is a lot and not the small rocks you would expect to find on an addict. http://dailysentinel.com/news/article_160fbb06-c20c-11df-a7c2-001cc4c002e0.html. If you don't want 10 years in jail then don't carry 50 grams of crack around. It really is that simple. These sentences are supposed to be a deterent and if we do away with them, where is the deterent then?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rtaylor1974
When the Least of us Fails..We all Fail
04:12 PM on 06/01/2011
So by your logic the same 50 grams of powder is considerably less, and deserves a MUCH smaller sentence; because thats the way the legislation was drafted?? No matter if its WRONG...just keep trodding down the same path right ???
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
04:44 PM on 06/01/2011
I never said that. I think 50 grams of cocaine in whatever form deserves the exact same sentence. But this article is not about the differences in sentences between crack and powder it is about lowering the sentence for crack, which I believe is wrong. I'd rather increase the jail time for powder than lower it for crack.
photo
papapj
..light as a feather..
01:57 PM on 06/01/2011
Spyro Gyra - Morning Dance

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxbAR42jch8
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rich Bronson
01:54 PM on 06/01/2011
It makes good financial sense to make it retroactive.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
joeyfoto
“Écraser l'infamie!”
10:08 AM on 06/01/2011
By what standard was my last comment censored?

I've read the guidelines — it violated none of them.
Is consistency too much to ask?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vesaversa1
Politics is made up largely of irrelevancies.
09:55 AM on 06/01/2011
It's about time that the federal government intervene to fix some of the problems that we have in this country two tier justice system.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
elizlucinda
a mind is a terrible thing to waste
09:10 AM on 06/01/2011
This is the inequity that occurs when you have mandatory sentences with no discretionary element for judges. It's patently unfair for some people to spend A LONGER TIME in prison for possession of the same drug...albeit in a different form
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
02:10 PM on 06/01/2011
I agree but that's not the issue in this article. They are suggesting that what use to get you 10 years now only gets you 5. Why are we reducing sentences? It would make more sense and be more of a deterent to give 10 years for all people caught with 50 grams of any form of cocaine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rtaylor1974
When the Least of us Fails..We all Fail
04:21 PM on 06/01/2011
because too many people have been disproportinately affected by it . They still havent Leveled the playing field.... The setences are still longer for crack vs. powder not as much as before, but there is still a difference. You cant argue for the same sentences across the board when you have swaths of people doing large number of years versus their counterpart for the same drug is finished with the sentence.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kiffanik
09:06 AM on 06/01/2011
The 13th amendment made it legal to enslave as long as the state could convict of a crime, follow the cocaine-crack policies, where they were aimed, and where the drugs were introduced. This country has committed so many crimes against her own.......
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kiffanik
09:03 AM on 06/01/2011
Let's say they retro-act it, do they give these people their lives back? Throwing drug users into prison for 5-10 years because they did the poor drugs (if you did wealthy drugs you got rehab) was always about economic and racial denigration. Those with drug felonies used to lose their right to federal financial aid, and we all know what they job market looks like when it comes to offender re-entry which means we all of these people who have been relegated to uselessness. How do you fix that? If we'd really cared there would have been more investment into quality education and an economic environment that allowed for massive escapes from poverty.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
02:11 PM on 06/01/2011
50 grams is a lot for personal supply.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
equilange
you tell me
09:03 AM on 06/01/2011
Drug addiction and those who feed it are serious problems, neither of which are ever solved by throwing people into jail. If we can spend over 50k a year to lock people up, surely we can provide rehab, job and skills training to give hope and options to individuals on both sides of the equation, and to create positive options in the communities most effected by it. Smart policy that will only be made possible by dismantling the for profit prison system in the US. When no one really profits from criminalization, we will be free to look at the issue realistically and intelligently and then, and only then, will we be in a position to effect any positive solutions.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
02:13 PM on 06/01/2011
Isn't that just a reward for the crime, unless we as a country are willing to educate all of our citizens? Why should someone who commited a crime get a free education or skill training when the person who hasn't done wrong doesn't get those things?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:16 PM on 06/10/2011
you know what!! the prision system is getting rich. they do get a profit for the people in prison. The price on ever thing is 3 to 4 times higher than normal. so in a way they are getting rich ask any one or some one you know that is in prison. it is a government rip off. And guess what we the tax payer is paying for it too
09:03 AM on 06/01/2011
Someone wake me when we arrest the real drug dealers...Dow Chemicals. Go to the gov. pubs of druglibrary.org. You can use every inch of So. American soil to grow the cocoa plant but they couldn't make 500 mg of cocaine without importing chemicals from America. There are so many ways that they could end the so-called War on Drugs but then there's the matter of all that MONEY. Everyone makes money off of cocaine, the CIA has been a worldwide leader in the distribution of illicit drugs with their sources and contacts in SE Asia, the Middle East, and So. American (where the next series of non-nuclear wars will be conducted). And they wonder why people have complete disdain for our political and business leaders and institutions. They're all worthless, feckless people.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:43 AM on 06/01/2011
No drug abuser should be jailed. Instead of spending taxpayer money to jail them, rehabilitate them. Send them to mandatory rehab. Besides, all drugs should be legalized, regulated, and taxed.
10:13 AM on 06/01/2011
Yes. It irks me when people say if you legalize these drugs everyone will do them. No they wont. Just because Heroin is made legal, doesn't mean everyone is going to go running to the heroin store to get a hit. If you aren't doing heroin when it is illegal, you will probably not do it when its legal. Keep the education of these drugs as they are, but make them legal to stop this useless "War on Drugs".
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
02:17 PM on 06/01/2011
I would say only drugs that do not require manufacturing should be legal. Cocaine does not grow in its usable form, neither does meth or lsd or heroin. They take other chemicals to be usable. Legalize pot since it can be grown and used with out chemical manufacturing, but I have no desire to see meth or heroin sold at the corner smoke shop.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TXconfidnz
Schpelling Bea Regect
02:29 PM on 06/01/2011
I think yours is a pretty good request... drugs that are tampered with should be illegal. That being said, do you think chewing on coca leaves falls into the legal category?