Pubdate: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 Source: Boston Globe (MA) Copyright: 2003 Globe Newspaper Company Contact: http://www.boston.com/globe/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52 Author: Edward Walsh and Dan Eggen ASHCROFT TELLS PROSECUTORS TO KEEP TABS ON LENIENT SENTENCING ASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft has ordered federal prosecutors across the country to become more aggressive in reporting to the Justice Department cases in which federal judges impose lighter sentences than called for in federal sentencing guidelines. The directive, contained in a July 28 memo to prosecutors from Ashcroft, is the latest salvo in an escalating battle over how much discretion federal judges should have in handing down sentences in criminal cases. The more extensive reporting could lay the groundwork for the Justice Department to appeal many more of those sentencing decisions than it has in the past. The Ashcroft memo amended a section of the United States Attorneys' Manual that previously said that federal prosecutors had to report to the Justice Department only sentences that the prosecutors had objected to and wished to appeal. In the new directive, prosecutors were told to report all so-called ''downward departure'' sentencing decisions that meet certain criteria. The effect of the change will be to shift most decisions on whether to appeal a sentence that is less than called for in the sentencing guidelines from federal prosecutors to Justice Department lawyers in Washington. Ashcroft's critics reacted angrily to the memo, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, accused Ashcroft of engaging in an ''ongoing attack on judicial independence'' and of requiring federal prosecutors ''to participate in the establishment of a blacklist of judges who impose lesser sentences than those recommended by the sentencing guidelines.'' Justice Department lawyers, who had championed even tougher measures to limit judicial discretion in sentencing, say the change was needed because some judges have become more willing to ignore sentencing guidelines. The fact that nearly all departures from the guidelines resulted in more lenient sentences further angered Ashcroft and conservative-minded attorneys, officials said. Justice spokesman Mark Corallo said that in the past, federal prosecutors in Washington were alerted to problematic sentences on an ''ad hoc'' basis. By requiring US attorney's offices to report the lighter sentences in a systematic way, Corallo said, Ashcroft and his advisers will be able to identify judges and jurisdictions that deviate from legislative mandates on sentencing. Congress set the stage for the latest showdown over sentencing practices in April when it adopted an amendment to the ''Amber alert'' legislation on child abductions. The amendment, crafted and pushed by the Justice Department, restricted the ability of federal judges to depart from the sentencing standards and made it easier to appeal and overturn ''downward departures.'' Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the American Bar Association, and others strongly objected to the amendment. In a letter to Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, Rehnquist said that the measure ''would seriously impair the ability of courts to impose just and reasonable sentences.'' According to statistics compiled by the US Sentencing Commission, 35 percent of the sentences handed down in federal court in fiscal year 2001 fell below the range set in the sentencing guidelines. Almost half of those involved plea bargain agreements or other cases of ''substantial assistance'' to prosecutors, but 18 percent of the ''downward departures'' were for other reasons. The Justice Department appealed only 19 of more than 11,000 ''downward departure'' sentencing decisions by judges. In his memo to prosecutors, Ashcroft quoted approvingly from a May 5 speech by Rehnquist in which the chief justice said it was up to Congress to set sentencing policies. The memo did not quote another section of the same speech in which Rehnquist said that gathering information on sentencing practices could help Congress make decisions, but also ''could amount to an unwarranted and ill-considered effort to intimidate individual judges in the performance of their judicial duties.'' - --- MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart