Pubdate: Fri, 06 Feb 2004
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Copyright: 2004 Globe Newspaper Company
Contact:  http://www.boston.com/globe/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52
Author: Shelley Murphy

JUDGE WOLF RAPS FOCUS ON GUNS, DRUGS IN US DOCKET

A federal judge yesterday accused the US attorney's office in Massachusetts 
of spending too much time on drug and gun cases that belong in state court, 
instead of focusing on federal crimes such as public corruption and 
white-collar offenses that he said would have a greater impact on society.

US District Judge Mark L. Wolf, in an unusually frank discussion with 
reporters, said his fundamental problem is with the type of cases being 
brought by federal prosecutors under US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan "and 
the fact that they are being brought, in my view, at the expense of 
important federal cases that it would take a lot of hard work to develop."

Wolf, who made his remarks during a monthly session sponsored by Chief US 
District Judge William G. Young and in a follow-up interview, said US 
District Court in Boston is flooded with cases that have been developed by 
state and local police but are brought in federal court, where defendants 
face longer prison terms if convicted.

"When federal prosecutors are preoccupied with presenting cases that have 
been investigated by state and local agencies, there's a real opportunity 
cost, and it means they're not doing the longer term, grand jury-type 
investigations which are likely to get the bigger and morally more culpable 
people," Wolf said.

Although Wolf just finished presiding over the carjacking and murder trial 
of Gary Lee Sampson, who became the first person in Massachusetts sentenced 
to die under the federal death penalty, he repeatedly stressed that he 
wasn't talking about the Sampson case and that his criticism wasn't related 
to that case.

Stung by Wolf's criticism, Sullivan said that the judge is "simply wrong" 
and should focus on his own job, instead of worrying about Sullivan's.

"He obviously believes that he could do a much better job managing the 
office," Sullivan said. "But the fact of the matter is that's not his job, 
it's mine.

"I would disagree with his characterization of the office," the US attorney 
said. "He just doesn't have accurate information."

It was not the first time that Wolf and Sullivan have sparred over how the 
US attorney's office is run.

In November 2002, Wolf ordered Sullivan to appear in his courtroom to 
respond to allegations that prosecutors had either failed to turn over 
evidence to defense lawyers in criminal cases or had belatedly done so.

Wolf is the only federal judge in Boston to order the US attorney to appear 
before him. He has done so three times, with Sullivan and two of his 
predecessors.

In the 2002 case, Sullivan was miffed because he was at the dentist when he 
learned that Wolf had ordered his presence in his courtroom an hour later. 
Wolf threatened to hold Sullivan in contempt when he didn't show up. He did 
appear the following week.

Yesterday, Wolf said his comments were not directed solely at Sullivan, who 
was appointed US attorney by Attorney General John D. Ashcroft in the fall 
of 2001. Wolf acknowledged that federal prosecutors first started bringing 
state drug and gun cases into federal courts in the late 1980s, as part of 
a national initiative to target urban violence.

But Wolf said the trend has become a problem as it has escalated in recent 
years, with more cases involving low-level drug dealers.

"Drug crimes are very serious; they destroy the lives of individuals, 
families, and communities," he said. "I'm not suggesting that these crimes 
are unimportant. But it's never been the case in this country that people 
felt that every case that was important should be a federal case, and the 
federal courts have limited resources."

Wolf, a deputy US attorney and chief of the public corruption unit under US 
Attorney William F. Weld from 1981 to 1985, said he decided to go public 
with his concerns because he has a reverence for the US Department of 
Justice and because he believes it should do better.

He worked in Washington for the Justice Department in the 1970s, first as 
special assistant to the US deputy attorney general and then as special 
assistant to the US attorney general.

Wolf said he was upset that federal judges have been portrayed as "soft on 
crime," leading to the Feeney Amendment, which Congress passed last year to 
require the US Sentencing Commission to keep records of judges who sentence 
defendants to less time than called for under federal sentencing guidelines.

"The federal judges are not soft on crime, but there are a lot of federal 
judges who know what a real federal crime is," said Wolf. "We deal with the 
cases that are brought to us."

In January, Wolf said he sentenced a Cape Cod woman convicted of heroin 
charges to two years in prison, three months less than called for under 
sentencing guidelines, because she suffered from bipolar disorder, was a 
heroin addict, and had a history of other problems. He said he was 
disturbed that a Rhode Island man who supplied heroin to the Cape Cod ring 
was not indicted, even though he had been identified.

At that sentencing, Wolf said: "It's entirely up to the Department of 
Justice to decide how to devote its limited resources. But it's up to every 
citizen to make a judgment as to whether those choices are being made in a 
way that really serves the public interest."

Now, because of the Feeney Amendment and the Justice Department's 
aggressive strategy in appealing sentences in which the judge departed from 
federal sentencing guidelines, Wolf said it is possible that a federal 
prosecutor will spend time appealing a three-month sentencing disparity, 
instead of chasing the drug ring's supplier.

Sullivan said no decision has been made on whether to appeal the heroin 
addict's sentence.

Sullivan said the crime-fighting strategy employed by federal prosecutors 
today is much different from what it was when Wolf worked in the US 
attorney's office 20 years ago. He said Ashcroft has asked all of the 
nation's US attorneys to develop strategies to reduce gun violence in their 
districts, an approach they believe has helped reduce violent crime.

"We can't turn our backs on neighborhoods because a judge believes we 
shouldn't be prosecuting these cases," Sullivan said. "Congress decides 
what conduct is a federal crime. We decide which cases we're going to bring 
federally."

Sullivan also insisted that his office's efforts in targeting drugs and 
guns have not kept his prosecutors from bringing significant organized 
crime, white collar, and antiterrorism cases. He noted that the office's 
health-care fraud unit is nationally acclaimed.

Sullivan said he doesn't criticize the federal judiciary, even though he 
believes there are things the court could do differently and "much more 
efficiently."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman