home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- LAW, Page 63Let Punishment Fit the CrimeA controversial sentencing scheme gets a go-ahead
-
-
- Judges have traditionally enjoyed such leeway in meting out
- jail terms that one prisoner could serve many times as long as
- another for a similar crime. Concerned about unfair -- and often
- overly lenient -- sentences, Congress in 1984 created the U.S.
- Sentencing Commission, which issued a manual that greatly restricts
- judges' discretion in sentencing 40,000 federal defendants a year.
- The new system, for crimes committed since Nov. 1, 1987, also
- abolished parole and sharply limited probation and time off for
- good behavior.
-
- Defense lawyers quickly launched a legal assault against the
- new system. The result was chaos, with 158 federal judges declaring
- the arrangement unconstitutional and 116 ruling it to be proper.
- No one could tell what penalties would be imposed or whether they
- would stick. Moving briskly to end the confusion, the U.S. Supreme
- Court last week upheld the commission and its rules by a vote of
- 8 to 1.
-
- "This is one of the most important decisions handed down by
- the court in this decade," said Federal Appeals Judge William
- Wilkins Jr. of South Carolina, the commission's chairman. The
- result, he said, will be "more uniform, fair and truthful
- sentences." The impact will reach far beyond the several thousand
- federal defendants who must now be resentenced. The new system
- means stiffer penalties for white-collar crimes, 87% of which
- currently end in probation.
-
- Many lawyers contend that the rules may sharply limit plea
- bargaining after indictments, thus crowding court calendars. The
- crunch behind bars is expected to get worse. The 50,000 inmates
- jamming federal penitentiaries are already 60% more than capacity.
- "We're going to see dramatic increases in prison terms and prison
- overcrowding," predicts Sam Buffone, chairman of an American Bar
- Association committee on the sentencing system.
-
- The federal manual features a chart that puts infractions into
- 43 categories and lists corresponding penalties. The sentence is
- increased according to such factors as use of a weapon, the amount
- of money involved and prior criminal record. A judge can depart
- from the recommended numbers in unusual circumstances but must
- explain why in writing; both sides can then appeal the sentence.
-
- In the case decided by the Supreme Court last week, which
- stemmed from a 1987 Kansas City cocaine bust, the sentencing chart
- called for a 15-to-21-month jail term for defendant John Mistretta.
- The federal district court had given him 18 months, but Mistretta's
- lawyer argued that the sentencing system violated the Constitution
- by blurring the separation of powers among the branches of
- Government. Congress had, for instance, given both legislative and
- executive functions to a commission within the judicial branch. The
- commission's recommendations have the force of law unless Congress
- vetoes them within six months. Justice Harry Blackmun's majority
- decision admitted that this setup is an "unusual hybrid" but said
- Congress had been "practical" in asking experts to handle a
- technical task.
-
- Although the opponents have lost the separation-of-powers
- argument, they have already filed numerous other cases contending
- that the restrictions on sentencing violate due process of law. The
- Mistretta case, says President Ephraim Margolin of the National
- Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, is merely the "opening
- shot in a lengthy campaign."