In the United States, we have a severe under-incarceration problem

[vcdgrips]

Having said the above, 45% of federal prisoners are drug related.

Admittedly extrapolating from the state numbers/ratios, that would mean approximately 10% are possession only cases.

That number does not comport with my personal experience as opposed to those being convicted of possession with the intent to distribute.

My point being, I suspect the truth is a bit more nuanced, state to state, state to federal, and federal district to federal district, than either “side” is fully conveying.


FWIW/YMMV


https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics...e_offenses.jsp

[CWM11B]

Cool. If 21 is the new juvenile age, maybe that should be when adult rigghts begin as well. Drivers license, voting, etc. Not that it would prevent them from voting, especially in Illinois.

[John Hearne]

Surprisingly decent article on this topic:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...nsG-1gOqQ8k4Xo

[TC215]

@vcdgrips

What are your thoughts on Main Justice ordering the USAO’s to treat crack cases like powder cases, and the recent policy change on sentencing recommendations/charging on crimes that carry minimum mandatory sentences?

These changes have basically been ignored by the media, as far as I can tell.

[vcdgrips]

TC215
Minor ramble and in the weeds follows:

It is a matter of public record as embodied in filed plea agreements that my office and by extension, myself, support and advocate for the powder/crack equivalency. I
Would note the such treatment is a matter of policy, not law as presently construed by the 8th Circuit. As such, it is a matter of public record that multiple judges in my district, and nationwide, do not apply the equivalency when determine the sentencing guidelines and imposing sentences.

Re charging crimes with mandatory minimums, the bulk of our cases ( and indeed many federal cases) have ties to drug trafficking organizations, involve drug amounts far beyond the min. Mandatory thresholds, involve violence( production/receipt/distribution of child sexual abuse materials are considered crimes of violence btw) and or involve folks with such factors in their background such that many cases can and will be charged with mandatory minimums.

Having said that, it is a matter of public record that in the controlled substances context, many are charged with a mandatory min sentence of 10 years- Max Life (21 USC 841/846 (b)(1)(A) but are allowed to plead to the lesser included charge of (b)(1)(B) which only has a 5 year mandatory min-Max 40 years. The advisory guideline sentence is often well above the 10 year mark anyway and most judge are still imposing significant sentences.

Notably in the federal system, defendants do 85% of the sentence imposed, minimum, and have terms of supervised release (3-10 years typically) wherein if they violate (new crimes, drug use, no job, failure too pay fines, restitution etc ) they can be sent back to prison for the bulk of the term of supervised release with no credit given for the time served on supervised release.

PS-I have been prosecuting for 25 years at the federal level. While the federal sentencing guidelines were mandatory in the beginning of my career, they have been advisory the majority of it. The vast majority of the time, particularly in my cases, and those of my colleagues in which I know all the pertinent facts, judges in my district impose appropriate sentences.

[TC215]

TC215
Minor ramble and in the weeds follows:

It is a matter of public record as embodied in filed plea agreements that my office and by extension, myself, support and advocate for the powder/crack equivalency. I
Would note the such treatment is a matter of policy, not law as presently construed by the 8th Circuit. As such, it is a matter of public record that multiple judges in my district, and nationwide, do not apply the equivalency when determine the sentencing guidelines and imposing sentences.

Re charging crimes with mandatory minimums, the bulk of our cases ( and indeed many federal cases) have ties to drug trafficking organizations, involve drug amounts far beyond the min. Mandatory thresholds, involve violence( production/receipt/distribution of child sexual abuse materials are considered crimes of violence btw) and or involve folks with such factors in their background such that many cases can and will be charged with mandatory minimums.

Having said that, it is a matter of public record that in the controlled substances context, many are charged with a mandatory min sentence of 10 years- Max Life (21 USC 841/846 (b)(1)(A) but are allowed to plead to the lesser included charge of (b)(1)(B) which only has a 5 year mandatory min-Max 40 years. The advisory guideline sentence is often well above the 10 year mark anyway and most judge are still imposing significant sentences.

Notably in the federal system, defendants do 85% of the sentence imposed, minimum, and have terms of supervised release (3-10 years typically) wherein if they violate (new crimes, drug use, no job, failure too pay fines, restitution etc ) they can be sent back to prison for the bulk of the term of supervised release with no credit given for the time served on supervised release.

PS-I have been prosecuting for 25 years at the federal level. While the federal sentencing guidelines were mandatory in the beginning of my career, they have been advisory the majority of it. The vast majority of the time, particularly in my cases, and those of my colleagues in which I know all the pertinent facts, judges in my district impose appropriate sentences.

I have an issue with an appointed official (Garland) making policy that gets around the min mans set by elected officials (congress).

I am extremely against raising the crack guidelines to match powder. The bill to do this has only passed in one chamber, but main justice decides to implement it anyway through policy. Of course, judges aren’t bound by the policy, but they’ll never see the cases if we’re unable to charge. Where I work, crack was king for a LONG time, and is now coming back. Most crack I’ve ever seized at once was a quarter-kilo. No way I’d get 500 grams in hand like the powder guidelines…you just don’t normally see crack in that amount. I could probably get there with historical weight, but still…

If they really wanted to do something useful, they would lower the amount of heroin to get to a min man.

[Dog Guy]

CT mayors wrestle with what data show is at root of gun violence: Chronic repeat offenders

https://news.yahoo.com/ct-mayors-wre...ycsrp_catchall

Too long to do much quoting, but a few nuggets follow. None of this is a surprise to members of this forum.

"Last week at the state Capitol, Woods joined Connecticut’s big city mayors, who departed from the new decriminalization orthodoxy to push a package of proposed laws that would enhance bail and sentencing laws as they apply to repeat gun criminals. They backed up the legislative pitch with a startling statistical analysis of gun crimes that shows most gun criminals are chronic reoffenders who are committing second and third offenses while released on bail or probation."

"The mayors, all Democrats, arrived with the statistics and an array of inner city supporters, including mothers with emotional stories about murdered children. But it was unclear what reception their proposals would get from the Democratic-controlled legislature, where recent gun proposals trend more toward limiting gun access than prosecution. There was some support for the proposals from Republicans."

The analysis is based on arrest records collected by the Hartford and Waterbury police departments and was prepared by the Chief State’s Attorney’s office. The data shows the number of arrests in Waterbury is slightly less than in Hartford, but the percentages track.

In Hartford, shooting suspects had long criminal records; half those arrested over the last three years had been arrested in the city for something else within the prior year and one half. On average, they had 10 prior arrests, three for felonies. Most are men (95%), 18- to 34-years-old (70%).

"Hartford data drawn from 345 gun violence incidents between January 2019 and March 2021 shows that 85% of the suspects arrested for gun crimes had been convicted of gun crimes previously.

Last year, of the 44 people arrested in Hartford for murders or attempted murders with guns, 39% had charges pending from other crimes, but had been released from custody after posting bond. Fifteen percent were on probation. Five percent were on parole. Of those arrested last year, 39% had prior convictions for violent felonies or gun crimes.

The victims, according to the data, differ little from their shooters.

In Hartford over the last three years, between 58 and 74% of both shooting victims and suspects had prior involvement with the criminal justice system and most had extensive criminal histories: 65% had been in prison, 73% had prior felony convictions and served periods of probation, the data shows.

In the cases of most victims and shooters, only one or two of their 10 prior arrests prior arrests resulted in incarceration. More than half were dismissed or expunged some other way.

The bottom line, according to a summary by Chief State’s Attorney Patrick Griffin, is that someone with a prior gun conviction is 8,000 times more likely than someone without a criminal record to be arrested for a shooting and nearly 400 times more likely to be arrested for a shooting than other convicted felons."