Judgment Day

In U.S. v. Grissom, Larry James Grissom was indicted on three counts of knowingly and intentionally distributing a mixture and substance containing cocaine base in the amounts of 28, 49, and 28 grams, respectively. He agreed to plead guilty to Count Two, charging him with distribution of 49 grams of cocaine base, in exchange for the dismissal of Counts One and Three. Regarding his sentence, Grissom also agreed to a base offense level of 32, and acknowledged his base level could be as high as 34 if the court found he was a career offender. The parties did not reach agreement concerning Grissom's criminal history, and Grissom reserved his right to argue in favor of a downward departure from the calculated sentence range.

The parties' sentencing memoranda accepted the Guideline calculations of the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR), which set the base offense level at 32. The District Court for the Northern District of California, however, was uncomfortable with the sentencing range advocated by the government:

Click to read more ...

The 5-page document is available here, through the United States Sentencing Commission website. The website also provides this:

On April 16, 2008, the Commission voted to amend the commentary to §2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) to revise the manner in which combined offense levels are determined in cases involving cocaine base ("crack cocaine") and one or more other controlled substance. The Commission also voted to amend §1B1.10 [Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended Guideline Range (Policy Statement)] to provide retroactive effect to the amendment to §2D1.1. Official text of the amendments will be posted on the Commission's website at www.ussc.gov and incorporated into a forthcoming supplement to the Guidelines Manual.

These amendments take effect May 1, 2008. Until that date, the court should apply §2D1.1 as set forth in the 2007 Guidelines Manual, and §1B1.10 as set forth in the Supplement to the 2007 Guidelines Manual effective March 3, 2008

The Baltimore Sun has a great op-ed piece here about the Maryland Legislature and how it refuses to go “soft” on nonviolent drug offenders. Ronald Fraser writes the following:

During the recent session of the Maryland General Assembly, the House of Delegates rejected a bill that would have given courtroom judges greater sentencing leeway for first-time, nonviolent drug law offenders - including drug treatment programs rather than prison. The bill, sponsored by Del. Curtis S. Anderson of Baltimore, would have been a step in the right direction, but it was defeated for the usual reason: politicians' fear of being labeled "soft on crime."

Click to read more ...

"'Mumia Exception's' ugly head again" : The Philadelphia Inquirer has this story about Third Circuit Judge Thomas Ambro’s dissent in the Mumia Abu-Jamal case which reads, in part, "Our court has previously reached the merits of Batson claims . . . where the petitioner did not make a timely objection during jury selection . . . and I see no reason why we should not afford Abu-Jamal the courtesy of our precedents."

"[Enhanced] Sentence of man who solicited teen upheld in appeals court":  The Sioux City Journal reports here Eighth Circuit upholds district court’s enhanced sentence where defendant provided false testimony at his sentencing hearing and denied attempting to recruit a fellow inmate to kill the victim.