Supreme Court: Shorter Sentences for Crack Cocaine...

22,380
14,555
Joined
Mar 28, 2004
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal judges have the discretion to give "reasonably" shorterprison terms for crack-cocaine crimes to reduce the disparity with crimes involving cocaine powder.

art.crack.dea.jpg

Lawyers argue that crack-cocaine offenders were unfairly targeted.

corner_wire_BL.gif


The 7-2 ruling represents a victory for lawyers who argued that crack-cocaine offenders were unfairly targeted under U.S. sentencing guidelines.

Current federal penalties for selling 5 grams of crack cocaine can warrant the same prison sentence as dealing 500 grams of the powdered variety.

The Supreme Court case centered around Derrick Kimbrough of Norfolk,Virginia, who according to court records, pleaded guilty to distributing more than 50 grams of crack cocaine. Federal sentencing guidelines called for 19 to22.5 years behind bars. But Judge Raymond Jackson instead gave the defendant a 15-year sentence, calling the case "another example of how crack-cocaineguidelines are driving the offense level to a point higher than is necessary to do justice."

A federal appeals court overturned the case and sent it to a higher court, saying Jackson's discretion was "unreasonable when it is based on adisagreement with the sentencing disparity for crack and powder cocaine offenses."

Said Kimbrough's attorney, Michael Nachmanoff in October, "A sentence of 19 years for a man with no felony convictions who served his countryhonorably, who had never spent a night in jail ... that was ridiculous."

[h4]Don't Miss[/h4]
Kimbrough is a veteran of the 1991 Persian Gulf War and is African-American.

African-Americans were nearly 82 percent of defendants sentenced in federal court for dealing crack, but only 27 percent of those sentenced for dealingpowder cocaine, according to 2006 federal statistics. Each year, federal courts handle about 11,000 cocaine sentences, which are roughly evenly divided betweencrack and cocaine cases.

The issue long has been a source of contention between government prosecutors and civil rights advocates, who argue crack dealers are often targeted for longer prison terms because that drug is prevalent inurban and minority communities, while the powdered version is more commonly associated with higher-income users.

Writing for the majority, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg took a practical approach, saying it is important to preserve judicial discretion, while ensuring mostsentences remain within federal guidelines established two decades ago to ensure a measure of uniformity.

Ginsburg said a federal judge was right to give a crack offender a lesser prison term than the guidelines called for, since federal law "mandates onlymaximum and minimum sentences," she wrote. "It says nothing about appropriate sentences within those statutory guidelines."

Ginsburg noted the trial judge "honed in on the particular circumstances of Kimbrough's case and accorded weight to" reports by the U.S.Sentencing Commission that show "the crack/powder disparity yields unjustifiably harsh sentences for crack offenders."

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented in the Kimbrough case. Thomas said it will now be up to courts "to assume the legislative role ofdevising a new sentencing scheme," something Congress never intended.

The government had no immediate reaction to the high court's ruling.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission -- an independent federal agency that advises all three branches of government on sentences -- recently cut the gap inrecommended prison time for crack-cocaine offenses. The guidelines took effect November 1 after Congress decided not to overturn the changes.

The commission is scheduled to vote Tuesday on whether to make those guidelines retroactive for prisoners convicted in the past of crack dealing.

Almost 20,000 inmates could be eligible for shorter sentences under the proposed changes.

Congress recently has introduced at least four bills that would reduce the current disparity in cocaine sentences. One widely circulated proposal led bySens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, would revise the cocaine ratio downward to 20-to-1. That ratio is also supported by theSentencing Commission.

Harsher sentences for crack offenses came after a social epidemic of crack cocaine began destroying many urban areas in the 1980s.

"The crack-cocaine guidelines were put in place because crack was fueling crime waves across the country, in particular with respect to streetviolence," said Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. attorney in Miami who comments on legal matters for CNN. "And it is clear that crack cocaine and whitepowder cocaine had a very different impact in terms of not only the lives of the users but the impact on the community."
 
Good drop,my relatives was telling me about this weeks ago.Some will be home sooner than expected.
pimp.gif
Hopefully they can change their life around
 
50 grams of crack gets you 15 years.
indifferent.gif
i knowa dude who got caught with 300g of coke, 20k in cash and a pistol and only got 42 months. he did spend 80k on a lawyer but still.

they need to target meth now. cause once that hits cities all the crackheads are gonna flip and become methheads.
 
I've always been torn on the subject.

As someone who was relatively young in the 80's and early 90's when crack was REALLY big, I saw first hand what it did to folks, and really blame thehell out of it for my desensitized ways today.

Yet I can't help bu always feel sorry for the few who got busted and sentenced to inordinate amounts of jail time, strictly because the law mandated...

See, the best argument I can get from people is that crack is made, and not just made from a plant, but made from something already illegal. It's like, youalready were in the wrong for buying the coke, then you went ahead and made THIS?!? You slappin the law in the face! You cook up some ready white and hit theblock, you had no intention of ever doing anything BUT wrong... So in that sense, the laws were always fair to me.

Yet the other drug traffickers get light sentences. Crack was the poor people's way, and for that we got extra time. That was unfair. In all honesty,people were just trying to make a dollar out of 15 cents. The coke used to get washed with so much filth that crack almost became a necessity. People might buya little bit of coke, turn it into a lot more crack, and make a LOT more money.

YBI and other groups like this BUILT their entire empires on that mess. Coke was way too expensive...

Anyway, I know a lot of (relatively) good guys that got LONG sentences for the stuff. I hope they get out. The only thing is: when you let all these folk out,what do you expect them to do? The conviction is still ontheir record, and they will have very little by way of opportunity to succeed now, all for a crimethey committed long ago, in a time when they were at the very age that sees kids make dumb mistakes...

Let's hope they all turn into Jazz Hayden, instead of Frank Lucas...
 
Originally Posted by Kingof Cool17

umm is this a good thing or bad thing?
i don't really see it as a good or bad thing, I think it's fair considering the facts.
I guess another option would have been to increase the sentences of those possessing powder
ohwell.gif
 
they need to target meth now. cause once that hits cities all the crackheads are gonna flip and become methheads.
In New York City crack is the reason meth never really caught on, or rather hasn't yet. In the late '80s dealers tried to bring meth intothe city, but crack dealers wouldn't let it happen.

Crack was the poor people's way, and for that we got extra time.
 
oh, i didn't know that. i was just thinking about why people haven't tried to hit nyc with meth yet. i am almost positive meth will pretty muchreplace crack in the near future in all big cities.
 
Originally Posted by MPLSdunk

i am almost positive meth will pretty much replace crack in the near future in all big cities.

Yeah, so am I. Meth is a user's drug. More bang for your buck. I can only assume that it will be a problem in New York City soon enough.
 
It was no secret that the punishment handed down for possession of crack compared to coke was racist in nature, but they should've made more severe thepunishment of the latter instead of shortening the former.
 
i have heard meth is starting hit the hood a little bit here.
tired.gif
i hope it's not true, the last thing you need is a bunch of meth heads running around ahigh populated area. they need to start giving dudes caught with labs life. no joke, thats all they know and they are just gonna cook up another once theyget out anyways.
 
20,000 back on the street and odds are 75% will be back in or commit a crime that could be prevented by them still being incarcerated.
 
Originally Posted by VARISOXFAN

20,000 back on the street and odds are 75% will be back in or commit a crime that could be prevented by them still being incarcerated.

exactly
smh.gif
 
Now that just sounds wonderful
indifferent.gif

Are all of you guys serious? Pure cocaine should carry the same sentences as crack. Stiffer crack penalties in the 80's were only handed downbecause the majority of all crack dealers were black. Furthermore, the majority of drug dealers are not violent offenders, and prisons are overcrowded. Do themath; putting them back on the street may not be the best decision, but when the Bush administration is exponentially spending more money than the governmenttakes in, you have to cut back spending somewhere.
 
^I'd say meth, but we haven't seen as widespread of an epidemic ravaging communities like crack has.
 
Back
Top Bottom