Pubdate: Tue,  3 Oct 2000
Source: Dallas Morning News (TX)
Copyright: 2000 The Dallas Morning News
Contact:  P.O. Box 655237, Dallas, Texas 75265
Fax: (972) 263-0456
Feedback: http://dmnweb.dallasnews.com/letters/
Website: http://www.dallasnews.com/
Forum: http://forums.dallasnews.com:81/webx
Author:  David McLemore, The Dallas Morning News

DAS ON BORDER LAUNCH DRUG-CASE BOYCOTT

Federal Officials Don't Expect Sudden Court Jam

A state prosecutors' boycott of low-level federal drug cases along the 
U.S.-Mexican border began its first day Monday quietly enough.

Officials at the U.S. attorneys' offices that cover the border areas said 
there would be no instances of suddenly jammed court dockets because of the 
boycott.

"We anticipate a jump in the number of federal cases along the border," 
said Mervyn Mosbacker, U.S. attorney for the Houston-based Southern 
District of Texas, which ranges from Brownsville to Laredo. "However, we 
don't expect to see an immediate rise in the numbers."

Nor did the boycott have an immediate effect on other federal agencies on 
the front lines of the drug war. "We've received no instructions from U.S. 
attorney's office to change our practices. We're continuing our border 
checks as we have before," said Ramiro De Anda, spokesman for the U.S. 
Border Patrol, in McAllen. "We have been told we are not to decline 
prosecution if the DAs refuse our cases."

Which is exactly how prosecutors along the border in Texas, New Mexico, 
Arizona and California thought it would be.

"There was nothing dramatic occurring today," said El Paso County District 
Attorney Jaime Esparza. "It will take a few days before the federal 
government feels the pinch."

Mr. Esparza and other local district attorneys in counties along the border 
vowed to stop accepting small federal drug busts for county prosecution at 
the beginning of fiscal year 2001, which began Sunday. The long-simmering 
dispute is centered on the district attorneys' complaint that the federal 
government provides insufficient funding in return for the service.

For years, many county prosecutors had extended the federal government the 
courtesy of handling low-level drug cases – such as those involving 100 
pounds or less of marijuana – so federal agents could concentrate on major 
traffickers.

"We feel the ball is now in the government's court," Mr. Esparza said. "We 
want to see if the government shows any willingness to offer some long-term 
solutions. If so, we can resolve this quickly."

Congress approved $12 million for a border-assistance fund this summer to 
cover costs of courtroom technology, construction of holding facilities, 
administrative expenses and the cost of court-appointed attorneys. That is 
nice, but it does not cover the bigger costs to the counties, Mr. Esparza said.

"Payment for pretrial incarceration and the cost of prosecution are the 
issues that really hit the counties hard," Mr. Esparza said. "We can't 
afford to continue doing the federal government's job for free."

Cost issues

An informal Justice Department study found that state prosecutors from 
Brownsville to San Diego, Calif., absorbed an estimated cost of $96 million 
to handle federal drug cases over the last five years. In Texas, the annual 
cost borne by border prosecutors ranged from about $1 million to $5 million.

Only one border-county district attorney has agreed to continue taking 
federal cases. Maverick County District Attorney Roberto Serna reached 
agreement with Bill Blagg, U.S. attorney for the San Antonio-based Western 
District of Texas, to continue accepting referrals for reimbursement at a 
rate of 32.3 percent of the total caseload.

Webb County District Attorney Joe Rubio has refused to handle federal 
referrals for about three years.

Just up the border, Val Verde County will continue accepting referrals 
until Jan. 1, when a new district attorney will be sworn in. Fred 
Hernandez, who is considered the likely victor in the district attorney's 
race, has already said he will join the boycott.

"For us, the situation is easy, compared to what the government will face," 
Mr. Esparza said. "It's one less thing we have to do. But we believe the 
smarter solution would be for the government to continue funding the 
long-standing relationship between the federal government and the states 
and recognize our role in the war on drugs."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D