Pubdate: Fri, 24 Aug 2001
Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA)
Copyright: 2001 San Jose Mercury News
Contact:  http://www.sjmercury.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/390
Author: Howard Mintz, Mercury News

REVERSAL SOUGHT ON DRUG RULING

U.S. Attorneys Say War Compromised

Warning that the federal government's ability to prosecute major drug 
traffickers is at stake, the U.S. Justice Department moved Thursday 
to wipe out a recent federal appeals court ruling that struck down 
one of the key weapons in the war on drugs.

In an extraordinary request, the U.S. attorneys from nine Western 
states, including California, asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of 
Appeals to immediately withdraw an Aug. 10 ruling that found 
Congress' 1984 sentencing scheme to punish major drug traffickers 
unconstitutional. The 9th Circuit ruling, which has sweeping 
implications for thousands of drug cases across the West, invalidated 
the principal means federal prosecutors have used since the Reagan 
administration to punish drug dealers.

'Threatens Sentences'

The panel's decision will seriously hamper the government's ability 
to prosecute large-scale drug trafficking in this circuit," Bush 
administration lawyers wrote. "The panel's decision threatens to 
invalidate countless sentences and will result in a deluge of 
litigation in the district courts of this circuit."

The Justice Department's urgent legal maneuver stems from a 2-1 9th 
Circuit decision in a Seattle case involving convicted 
methamphetamine dealer Calvin Buckland. Federal drug laws have relied 
heavily on sentencing defendants based on the amount of drugs 
involved in a case, but the federal appeals court found that 
unconstitutional.

Among other things, the 9th Circuit struck down the 1984 law because 
it empowered a judge, instead of a jury, to increase prison sentences 
based on evidence introduced after trial about the amount of drugs 
associated with a defendant. The law allowed judges to increase 
sentences beyond the statutory maximum based on drug amounts.

Minimum Sentences

In striking down the statute used to impose these so-called 
"enhanced" sentences, the 9th Circuit also wiped out mandatory 
minimum sentences, a controversial method of imposing prison terms on 
drug dealers that vastly reduces a judge's discretion.

"The potential reach of this is pretty enormous," said Barry Portman, 
Northern California's federal public defender.

The 9th Circuit based its ruling on a sentencing decision last year 
by the U.S. Supreme Court, splitting with four other federal appeals 
courts to consider the issue.

In its brief, the Justice Department warns that the ruling already is 
causing chaos in the courts. Defendants are withdrawing from plea 
agreements, seeking to dismiss indictments and appealing sentences, 
according to prosecutors.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Josh