Federal drug laws produce a labeling issue. When you hear the term "drug trafficker," you may think about Pablo Escobar or Walter White, however the reality is that under federal law, drug traffickers consist of individuals who buy pseudo-ephedrine for their methamphetamine dealership; act as intermediary in a series of little transactions; or perhaps pick up a luggage for the incorrect friend. Thanks to conspiracy laws, everybody on the totem pole can be subject to the exact same extreme mandatory minimum sentences.
To the men and ladies who drafted our federal drug laws in 1986, this may come as a surprise. According to Sen. Robert Byrd, cosponsor of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, the factor to attach 5- and ten-year mandatory sentences to drug trafficking was to punish "the kingpins-- the masterminds who are actually running these operations", and the mid-level dealers.
Fast forward twenty-five years. Today, practically everybody convicted of a federal drug criminal offense is founded guilty of "drug trafficking", which generally leads to at least a five- or ten-year compulsory prison sentence. That's a lot of time in federal jail for many people who are minor parts of drug trade, the large bulk of whom are men and women of color.
This is the system that federal district Judge Mark Bennett sees every day. Judge Bennett rests on the district court in northern Iowa, and he manages a lot of drug cases. "Never ever could I have actually envisioned," he writes in a current piece in The Country, "that ... after nineteen years [as a federal district court judge], I would have sent 1,092 of my fellow citizens to federal jail for mandatory minimum sentences ranging from sixty months to life without the possibility of release. Most of these women, guys and young people are nonviolent drug addicts." What about the kingpins? "I can count them on one hand," he says.
The numbers can't convey the unreasonable catastrophe of it all. This is how he explains a current drug trafficking case:
I recently sentenced a go to website group of more than twenty accused on meth trafficking conspiracy charges. All of them plead guilty. Eighteen were 'tablet smurfers,' as federal district attorneys put it, meaning their role totaled up to frequently buying and delivering cold medication to meth cookers in exchange for really small, low-grade quantities to feed their extreme dependencies. Most were out of work or underemployed. Several were single mothers. They did not sell or straight distribute meth; there were no hoards of money, weapons or counter surveillance equipment. All of them dealt with mandatory minimum sentences of sixty or 120 months.
There is data to suggest that Judge Bennett's experience is not uncharacteristic. In 2007, the U.S. Sentencing Commission put together considerable information on drug and fracture sentencing. They discovered that in 2005, most of the lowest-level drug- and crack-trafficking accused-- males and females referred to as "street-level dealerships", "couriers/mules", and "renter/loader/lookout/ enabler/users"-- got 5- or ten-year compulsory jail sentences. This is specifically real for crack-cocaine offenders, the majority of whom are black; regardless of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, offering a small quantity of fracture drug (28 grams) brings the very same compulsory minimum sentence-- 5 years-- as offering 500 grams of powder drug.
This is the truth for which advocates of severe federal drug laws should account. We can not pretend that heavy sentences for women like Kemba Smith and men like Jamel Dossie are the fluke mistakes of overboard laws. We should admit that our sentencing of minor players in the drug trade to prison terms implied for the leaders of large drug companies-- as a typical incident, not as an exception. As a result, we needlessly lock up lots of minor culprits for long periods. Judge Bennett decries the human costs of these sentences:
If lengthy compulsory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug addicts in fact worked, one may be able to justify them. I have seen how they leave hundreds of thousands of young children parent less and thousands of aging, infirm and dying moms and dads childless.
Here, once again, we have proof that Judge Bennett is best: long obligatory sentences are unnecessary for a lot of drug culprits. In 2002 and 2003, Michigan and New York repealed mandatory sentences for drug transgressors and offered judges the power to enforce much shorter sentences, probation, or drug treatment.
He has actually seen necessary laws written for the most serious, large-scale drug dealerships used to the guys and women on the lowest rungs of the drug trade, and he has actually seen it occur a lot. We when imagined that extreme necessary sentences would be used to deal with the leaders of large drug operations.
If you have been charged with a drug related offense and need qualified representation, contact us to discuss your case.
Contact:
Mace Yampolsky & Associates
625 S 6th St.
Las Vegas, NV 89101
(702) 385-9777