Tracknum: 196751012226994 Pubdate: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 Source: The Post and Courier (SC) Copyright: 2002 Evening Post Publishing Co. Contact: http://www.charleston.net/index.html Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/567 Author: Herb Frazier, of the Post and Courier Staff Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/coke.htm (Cocaine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/racial.htm (Racial Issues) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) Insight COCAINE SENTENCING GUIDELINES WITHSTAND WIDESPREAD CRITICISM Different Penalties For Crack, Powder Cocaine Began During Crack Epidemic Of 1980s Candace Hardin of North Charleston recently received 18 months in prison for her role in a miniature crack cocaine factory at her Stratton Drive home. While that's hardly big news, her case brushed up against an ongoing national debate over federal sentencing rules for crack cocaine, a highly addictive derivative of powder cocaine that seemed to explode on the American drug scene in the 1980s. Congress, determined to do something to stem the sudden flood of crack abuse, passed laws in 1986 and 1988 that did two things. First, they greatly increased the penalties for possession of crack relative to those for cocaine in its powdered form. Second, they reduced the amount of crack cocaine necessary to trigger mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking - a more serious offense. Over the years, the differences between the guidelines for crack and powdered cocaine have sparked debate. Critics say the law creates disparities in the way black and white drug offenders are treated. Judicial activist groups, such as the non-profit Sentencing Project, have lobbied to overturn and rewrite the guidelines. And while the law remains on the books, even some judges are ambivalent. Candace Hardin's reduced sentence came after she helped prosecutors convict her husband, Kelon Renordo Hardin, whom her family claimed forced her to help him manufacture crack. He is facing life in prison due to prior drug convictions. When it was time for Candace Hardin's trial, her attorney - Amanda Keaveny - faced some stark differences in the law. If sentenced under the crack guidelines, Harden was looking at a sentence of nine to 11 years in prison. Under the powder cocaine guidelines, the sentence would be three years or less. Keaveny asked U.S. District Judge David Norton to sentence her client under the powder guidelines, and Candace Hardin pleaded guilty to possession of powder cocaine - its state before it is crystallized into crack. Norton denied Keaveny's request to sentence Hardin under the more lenient guidelines, but in doing so he said that it was his position that the crack guidelines were distorted, though there was nothing he could do about that. In the end, Hardin wound up with a light sentence not because of those guidelines, but because she cooperated with prosecutors in the case against her husband, who was convicted on Jan. 15. He will be sentenced in about three months. Most of those sentenced for crack cocaine don't fare nearly as well. Nationally, the average sentence in 2000 for crack cocaine possession was 120 months, compared to an average sentence for powder cocaine possession of 85 months, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Even more striking are the racial differences. In 2000, federal prosecutors nationwide convicted 5,012 people for selling crack. Of that number, 5.7 percent were white and 9 percent were Hispanic. Eighty-four percent were black. Those convicted of powder cocaine offenses were more diverse. In 2000, 5,344 people were convicted for selling powder cocaine. Half that number were Hispanic, 18.2 percent were white and 30.3 percent were black. Critics say the problems with the law go beyond racial questions. For instance, it is possible for a street dealer with a small amount of crack to receive a longer sentence than the person who manufactures the crack and takes the biggest profit - if all he's caught with is powder, that is. William D. McColl, national affairs director at the Lindesmith Center - Drug Policy Foundation in Washington, D.C., believes the nation's get-tough attitude on drug offenders has distorted sentencing, making it possible to get more time in prison for drug possession than for some violent crimes. And black males, he said, are bearing the brunt of it. But the nation's drug czar John P. Walters has said the perception that the criminal justice system's war on drugs is unjustly punishing young black men is one of "the great urban myths of our time." But while some challenge the sentencing standards, others argue that the law has done exactly what it was meant to do: provide tougher penalties for a particularly devastating drug that was wreaking havoc on communities across the United States. They point out that the law is race-neutral and that legal attempts to overturn the guidelines on constitutional grounds during the mid-1990s failed. The debate will continue. Separate bills in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate are aimed at closing the sentencing gap. The House bill would do away with a mandatory minimum sentence for crack, creating a sentence for cocaine regardless of its form. The Senate bill would narrow the gap between the two guidelines. Insight is a regular feature in which Post and Courier writers take a look at the news behind the news. Is there a topic or an issue you'd like for us to explore? Please send suggestions to Insight, c/o Shirley Greene, The Post and Courier, 134 Columbus St., Charleston, S.C. 29403.