Federal drug laws create a labeling problem. When you hear the term "drug trafficker," you might consider Pablo Escobar or Walter White, but the reality is that under federal law, drug traffickers consist of people who buy pseudo-ephedrine for their methamphetamine dealership; serve as middleman in a series of little transactions; or even pick up a travel suitcase for the wrong pal. Thanks to conspiracy laws, everyone on the totem pole can be based on the exact same severe necessary minimum sentences.
To the men and ladies who prepared 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 reason to connect five- and ten-year mandatory sentences to drug trafficking was to penalize "the kingpins-- the masterminds who are really running these operations", and the mid-level dealerships.
Fast forward twenty-five years. Today, practically everyone founded guilty of a federal drug criminal offense is founded guilty of "drug trafficking", which typically results in a minimum of a five- or ten-year mandatory jail sentence. That's a lot of time in federal jail for lots of people who are minor parts of drug trade, the huge 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 deals with a great deal of drug cases. "Never ever could I have actually pictured," he writes in a current piece in The Nation, "that ... after nineteen years [as a federal district court judge], I would have sent out 1,092 of my fellow citizens to federal jail for mandatory minimum sentences varying from sixty months to life without the possibility of release. The majority of these females, guys and young people are nonviolent drug abuser." What about the kingpins? "I can count them on one hand," he says.
The numbers can't communicate the ridiculous tragedy of all of it. This is how he describes a current drug trafficking case:
I recently sentenced a group of more than twenty offenders on meth trafficking conspiracy charges. All of them plead guilty. Eighteen were 'pill smurfers,' as federal district attorneys put it, implying their function amounted to regularly purchasing and delivering cold medication to meth cookers in exchange for very little, low-grade quantities to feed their serious addictions. A lot of were unemployed or underemployed. A number of were single mothers. They did not offer or directly disperse meth; there were no hoards of money, guns or counter surveillance devices. All of them faced necessary minimum sentences of sixty or 120 months.
They found that in 2005, the majority of the lowest-level drug- and crack-trafficking offenders-- men and women explained as "street-level dealerships", "couriers/mules", and "renter/loader/lookout/ enabler/users"-- received five- or ten-year necessary jail sentences. This is especially true for crack-cocaine accused, many of whom are black; regardless of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, selling a small amount of fracture cocaine (28 grams) carries the exact same compulsory minimum sentence-- 5 years-- as selling 500 grams of powder https://www.criminallawyerslasvegas.com/drug-conspiracy-defense-las-vegas/ cocaine.
This is the reality for which advocates of extreme federal drug laws need to account. We must admit that our sentencing of minor individuals in the drug trade to jail terms suggested for the leaders of large drug organizations-- as a common incident, not as an exception.
If prolonged mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug user really worked, one might be able to justify them. However there is no proof that they do. I have seen how they leave hundreds of countless kids parent-less and countless aging, infirm and dying parents childless. They destroy families and strongly sustain the cycle of hardship and dependency.
Here, again, we have evidence that Judge Bennett is best: long necessary sentences are unneeded for the majority of drug transgressors. In 2002 and 2003, Michigan and New York repealed mandatory sentences for drug culprits and provided judges the power to impose shorter sentences, probation, or drug treatment.
For years, Judge Bennett has actually seen a system that does not make good sense. He has actually seen compulsory laws composed for the most serious, large-scale drug dealers applied to the men and women on the lowest rungs of the drug trade, and he has seen it happen a lot. We as soon as envisioned that extreme compulsory sentences would be utilized to handle the leaders of big drug operations. It's time our federal drug laws were fit to individuals that they actually target.
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