Pubdate: Sat, 19 Jul 2014
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2014 The Washington Post Company
Contact: http://mapinc.org/url/mUgeOPdZ
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Authors: Jerry Markon and Rachel Weiner
Page: A1

46,000 DRUG INMATES ELIGIBLE FOR LESS JAIL TIME

Sentencing Commission Vote Continues a Shift From Get-Tough Policies

The U.S. Sentencing Commission decided Friday that nearly 50,000 
federal drug offenders currently in prison are eligible for reduced 
sentences, a move that could flood the nation's courts and 
prosecutors with applications for leniency.

By a unanimous vote, the commission made retroactive an earlier 
change that had lightened potential punishments for most future drug 
offenders who are sentenced starting in November. Friday's move 
extends that change to 46,000 current inmates, allowing them to have 
their cases reviewed again by a judge.

The action by the commission - an independent agency that sets 
sentencing policies for federal crimes - means that nearly half of 
the nation's 100,000 federal drug inmates can apply for reductions. 
Those eligible could have their sentences shaved by an average of 
about two years, the commission said. Congress has until November to 
void the move, which would take effect next year, but there is little 
indication of opposition on Capitol Hill.

The sentencing commission vote is the latest sign of an emerging 
shift in the country's approach to criminal justice, particularly 
illegal drugs, in which the prevailing tough-on-drugs mentality is 
giving way to an increased emphasis on treatment and health. 
Democrats and some Republicans have supported slicing sentences for 
federal drug crimes, while at least 30 states have modified 
drug-crime penalties since 2009.

Yet the issue remains highly emotional for many, with the sentencing 
commission receiving more than 60,000 letters before Friday's vote, 
including from dozens of lawmakers, judges, attorneys and advocacy 
groups. The overwhelming majority favored the change, the commission said.

Advocates hailed the decision - which applies to most trafficking 
cases regardless of the drug - as among the most significant drug-law 
reforms in a generation, saying it will help reverse years of tough 
policies dating to the 1970s that have included controversial 
mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders.

"Tens of thousands of prisoners stand to benefit from this very just 
and very bold decision, and of course tense of thousands of their 
loved ones," said Mary Price, general counsel for Families Against 
Mandatory Minimums, an advocacy group. "It was a profound decision 
and a bold move by the commission, but also absolutely the right thing to do."

But some federal prosecutors and judges expressed strong opposition, 
warning that dangerous criminals could be freed and that judicial 
caseloads could skyrocket, especially along the southwest border in 
Texas, where the highest numbers of prisoners will be eligible for 
sentencing reductions.

"We're just disappointed," Dennis Boyd, executive director of the 
National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, said Friday. "We 
were hoping for something different."

The organization, which represents prosecutors who will be forced to 
respond to petitions for lower sentences, had told the commission in 
a letter that "tough sentencing laws . . . led to safer communities, 
which are now threatened."

Despite the dissension in the ranks, Friday's change is a personal 
victory for Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who has been at the 
forefront of efforts to reform the criminal justice system and has 
sought to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug crimes.

Given Holder's focus on the issue, some reform advocates were 
surprised when his department last month embraced a tougher proposal 
that would have allowed only about 20,000 current inmates to apply 
for leniency. The Justice Department's plan would have excluded 
inmates who were violent and had significant criminal histories.

A federal law enforcement official familiar with Holder's views said 
the Justice Department proposal was an acknowledgment of the 
opposition from some prosecutors who did not want to reopen closed 
cases and worried that the courts would be overwhelmed.

"It was an attempt to form a compromise within the prosecutor 
community," said the official, who spoke on the condition of 
anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

In private discussions with Justice officials, the sentencing 
commission then proposed more than doubling the number of eligible 
inmates but delaying any reduced sentences until November 2015. In a 
phone call Thursday, Holder told Judge Patti B. Saris, who chairs the 
commission, that the department would endorse that plan.

Since judges can review leniency applications over the next year, the 
federal law enforcement official said the department "thought the 
year-long delay was an alternative way to resolve the public safety 
concerns because any individuals with violent criminal histories will 
be filtered out."

In a statement Friday, Holder said he is pleased with the outcome, 
calling it a "milestone" and saying that the Bureau of Prisons would 
immediately begin notifying eligible inmates that they can apply for 
reductions.

The sentencing commission - which consists of seven voting members 
appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate - initially 
estimated that 51,000 offenders now imprisoned would be eligible. 
With the one-year delay, that number fell to 46,000 because some 
prisoners who might have been released right away will now have to 
serve another year.

Federal sentencing guidelines rely on a numeric system based on a 
number of factors, including the particular crime, whether a weapon 
was involved and a defendant's criminal history. The change decreases 
the value attached to most drug-trafficking offenses - regardless of 
the type or amount of drug - and the commission estimates that 
offenders will be eligible for an average reduction of 25 months. 
Since 2005, federal judges have not been required to adhere to the 
guidelines, but they must still take them into account.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom