Pubdate: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Copyright: 2004 San Jose Mercury News Contact: http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/390 Author: Stephen Henderson, Knight Ridder Note: Goodwin, for example, dropped a West Virginia drug dealer's sentence from 20 years to 12 months last week. A judge in Maine cut another dealer's prison stint from 19 years to six. Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/meth.htm (Methamphetamine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?140 (Rockefeller Drug Laws) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) SENTENCING RULING RAISES CONCERNS Federal Judges Forced To Give Lighter Jail Terms; Could Lead To Rewriting Of Laws WASHINGTON - U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin says criminal sentencing is at the heart of his job, something that ``comes up daily'' and consumes a lot of his time. For almost 15 years, federal guidelines at least made the rules of sentencing clear. Now they're in chaos, due to an unexpected Supreme Court decision that has upset sentencing practices in Goodwin's courtroom and in federal courts nationwide. In Blakely vs. Washington, the justices on June 24 stripped judges of their long-held power to increase sentences based on aggravating factors, saying the Constitution reserves those determinations for juries. The ruling already is producing lighter jail terms. It could inspire appeals by up to 250,000 inmates who were sentenced under the scheme the Supreme Court rejected. It also could force U.S. attorneys to rethink how they prosecute offenders, drag Congress into a messy effort to rewrite federal sentencing laws and perhaps require fast-track reconsideration of the issue by the high court. History may first remember the Supreme Court term that just ended for the justices' sharp criticism of the Bush administration's terrorism detentions and its eloquent assertions about the pre-eminence of civil liberties. History also will easily recall the court's failure to settle squabbles over the Pledge of Allegiance and Vice President Dick Cheney's secret energy task force. But Blakely was the late-term surprise that -- by challenging the entire federal-sentencing system -- could have more effect on everyday crime and punishment issues than any high court ruling in 30 years. Goodwin, for example, dropped a West Virginia drug dealer's sentence from 20 years to 12 months last week. A judge in Maine cut another dealer's prison stint from 19 years to six. In Utah, a judge knocked three years off the jail term of a man who took pornographic pictures of his 9-year-old daughter and another child. ``This is going to have far-reaching affects on all the cases that come before us,'' Goodwin said. ``We'll definitely need more guidance from the Supreme Court or the appeals circuits.'' In Blakely, the justices overturned a Washington state man's sentence because a judge added nearly three years to his term by considering factors that were related to, but not an essential part of, his kidnapping conviction. The justices ruled that a jury, rather than a judge, had to find that those factors were proved beyond a reasonable doubt in order for them to be considered in sentencing. ``It's definitely the most important criminal justice decision under'' Chief Justice William Rehnquist, said Doug Berman, an Ohio State University law professor who's been chronicling the aftermath of Blakely on a Web site, http://sentencing.typepad.com. ``In terms of the near-anarchy it's creating in the federal system and the possibility in state systems,'' Berman said, ``the fallout is more dramatic than anything I can even think of.'' In the first week after Blakely was decided, judges in nearly every federal jurisdiction concluded that it demands a sea change in the way they calculate sentences. Some, such as Goodwin, have begun writing full-blown opinions when meting out sentences, begging for higher courts to pursue Blakely's effect on federal sentencing. Take the case of Ronald Shamblin, a methamphetamine maker whom Goodwin had sentenced to 20 years in prison two weeks ago. Based on the crime he pleaded guilty to, Shamblin was eligible for only a 12-month sentence under federal guidelines. But the guidelines also called for Goodwin to impose a lot more jail time for other ``relevant conduct'' to the crime: possession of a weapon, having additional drugs that weren't part of the indictment, intent to sell the drugs to a minor, being the leader of a major drug operation. That's how Shamblin got 20 years. But Shamblin's lawyers argued last week that Blakely made the sentence illegal, because Goodwin, not the jury, concluded the facts that raised their client's sentence above 12 months. Goodwin agreed, and reduced the sentence. In his opinion, Goodwin echoed frustrations shared by many judges over the ``draconian'' nature of the federal sentencing guidelines. ``At 240 months, Shamblin's sentence represented much that is wrong about the sentencing guidelines,'' he wrote. ``At 12 months, it is almost certainly inadequate.'' The ripples from Blakely have inspired some to suggest that the Supreme Court, which has adjourned until the first Monday in October, might need to cut short its vacation to revisit the issue. Ordinarily, it wouldn't consider a case involving Blakely's effects before next winter. But by then there'll be ``a flurry of litigation,'' said Beth Brinkmann, a criminal defense specialist and partner at the Washington law firm of Morrison & Foerster. ``They'll need to resolve it quickly.'' - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin