Last month, a Colorado defendant petitioned a judge to postpone his sentence hearing. He did so in the hopes that sentencing reforms would soon be in place, ending mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug offenders. In his case, such the mandatory minimum would mean at least 20 years in prison, this for conspiracy to distribute cocaine. There would be a precedent for granting the delay. Just this past May, even before Attorney General Eric Holder made his sweeping announcement, another defendant in Colorado asked for a postponed sentence hearing. His mandatory minimum sentence entailed ten years' incarceration. His charge was of cocaine possession. The judge agreed to this request, viewing it as likely enough that sentencing reform was on the way.
Mandatory minimum sentences have posed many, many serious problems. For one thing, they mean packaged sentences that have to be enforced indiscriminately, regardless of the context. This means stories like one Alabama woman being automatically sentenced to 21 years in a federal prison on a first conviction. Her offense was conspiracy to sell crack cocaine. One Maryland man had the state throw out his case, but then he faced federal charges. When convicted of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, it was the man's third conviction. His mandatory minimum was a life sentence.
Another non-violent offender had two LSD distribution charges to his name. Upon being convicted of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, he was dealt the mandatory minimum sentence of life imprisonment. This was because it was a third offense. There are many, many stories like these. Nonviolent, even first-time offenders can receive the same sentences as violent drug traffickers. This has also led to serious overcrowding in federal prison. The population has spiked up to nearly 40 percent above capacity since the war on drugs started. Nearly half of those serving sentence in federal prison are doing so for drug convictions. Many of these inmates are like the people in the above stories. This overcrowding has also been a drain on state budgets.
In response to all these issues, the Attorney General declared this August that sentencing reforms were indeed underway. He announced that he would strive to get rid of mandatory minimums altogether. "Too many Americans go to too many prisons for far too long and for no truly good law enforcement reason," Holder said, "A vicious cycle of poverty, criminality, and incarceration traps too many Americans and weakens too many communities."
In his announcement, the Attorney General said that he had instructed federal prosecutors about how to file drug charges. Federal charges will now only appear in certain circumstances, meaning that qualifying low-level offenders will never be faced with the grim possibility of mandatory minimums in the first place. These offenders can have no part in a gang, drug cartel, etc., and cannot have committed any violent offenses. One day, they might be sentenced to community service and rehabilitation instead of prison.
Holder is also hoping to achieve "compassionate release" for older, nonviolent inmates who are suffering from ill health. He also voiced plans to seek legislation that would officially end mandatory minimum sentences for good. In this way, judges would have the freedom to hand down sentences that are in proportion to the crime. There is already bipartisan support for such measures.
For those who face drug charges now, however, these changes may come too late. No matter how seemingly small the charge, if they are federal charges, you could be looking at years, even decades, in prison. Then upon release, you would have to live out life as a convicted felon. If you do not face federal charges, your reputation and freedom can still be on the line. With the help of an experienced criminal defense attorney, you may be able to protect your future. Call today!
