Pubdate: Mon, 11 Apr 2005
Source: North Adams Transcript (MA)
Contact:  http://www.thetranscript.com
Address: 124 American Legion Dr.,
Copyright: 2005 New England Newspapers, Inc.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?224 (Cannabis and Driving)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing)

SENTENCING LAW SPAWNS INEQUITIES

An interesting discussion is under way in southern Berkshire County 
concerning the mandatory minimum sentences required for drug sales within 
1,000 feet of a school under the state's "drug-free school zone" 
legislation. The catalyst was a series of drug busts in the fall in the 
Great Barrington area that followed a lengthy police investigation. In all, 
19 young people were arrested on a variety of drug charges in September, 
the Berkshire Eagle reported, and a number of the charges involve a 
drug-free school zone allegation and, therefore, a two-year jail term if 
there is a conviction. But now a group has formed called the Concerned 
Citizens for Appropriate Justice, and a petition that collected 400 
signatures was submitted to Berkshire District Attorney David F. Capeless.

The group is asking Mr. Capeless to reconsider seeking charges carrying the 
mandatory minimum jail term for seven of the 19 arrested -- charged with 
small-scale marijuana distribution, the Eagle reported. And several members 
of the group met privately with the DA to discuss the matter. While a judge 
has no choice under the 1989 statute concerning the sentence for a 
conviction, the DA can decide whether to press the charge. Regardless of 
how these cases turn out, it is unfortunate that this debate is not taking 
place at the Massachusetts Statehouse, because that is where this 
problematic law originated. The law has the sort of mindless 
let's-show-the-public-how-tough-we-are-on-drugs edge that lawmakers on the 
state and federal level so often have produced.

As with virtually every mandatory sentencing bill passed anywhere, this one 
has more often than not proved a disaster. For every hardcore dealer put 
away, there are many more young people who made a stupid mistake -- not 
realizing they were within 1,000 feet of a school -- and then must pay far 
out of proportion to the crime.

It is no wonder many judges have decried the way this law ties their hands 
when they have been forced to sentence someone they thought deserved a 
second chance. How often have we seen this right here in Berkshire County? 
All it takes is for a high school student to sell a small amount of 
marijuana to a friend after school, or for a group of young people to be 
stopped with drugs while driving past a school, and they might be subject 
to this unforgiving statute.

Obviously, this law is meant to discourage drug dealers from preying on 
students, but does it do that in most cases? We doubt it. And aren't there 
other, even harsher sentencing options already available for the major 
dealer? This harebrained 1,000-foot rule allows judges no flexibility and 
no chance to show mercy to a young person, who might benefit from another 
chance more than from a tour in the slammer with hardened criminals. It is 
past time to ditch this rule.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth