borden's blog
Hinchey-Rohrabacher
Christiania is under threat again...
Conferences...
Big News: Sentencing Commission Crack Cocaine Sentencing Report is Out
Prof. Doug Berman on the Sentencing Law and Policy blog Alex Coolman on Drug Law Blog Jeralyn Merritt on TalkLeft Families Against Mandatory Minimums press releaseAlso our feature story on USSC's recommendations to Congress on the issue, effective unless Congress votes to block them, Drug War Chronicle issue before last. Talk amongst yourselves... :)
Gaia-Murdering Psychopath
Zero Tolerance for Zero Tolerance
Initial Hurwitz Prosecutor Resigns from DOJ #2 Post
The Latest Botched SWAT Team Raids
Maryland Drug Reform Bill and Veto Threat
"Its veto would raise the question of whether Mr. O'Malley is more interested in political posturing than in constructive reform of the state's criminal justice system."and the Sun:
The Sun editorial read: "Mr. O'Malley shouldn't veto the bill... the solution is not to retreat from a modest sentencing change, it's to allocate more money for drug treatment."
New York Rockefeller Reports
"We made brownies and I think we're dead."
Yes, it's bad to take a suspect's pot. But I don't think it warrants criminal charges. Disciplinary charges, to be sure, but the cop resigned first. And, in the grand scheme of things, it's better that someone who overdoses on drugs like heroin not to be afraid to seek medical attention. Some things are better confined to the realm of the doctor-patient privilege.I agree with the overdose prevention angle. In fact, we have a whole category devoted to that idea on this web site. But I'm not sure how I feel about just having disciplinary action in most cases. It's one thing to slip up, especially when it comes to an activity like drug use that shouldn't be a crime at all. It's another thing to arrest a person, take his drugs (his property), send him to jail for the drugs and then commit the same crime that you took the first guy to jail for. That makes me wonder about the officer's moral fiber (even though I don't call for sanctions of officers for mere drug use -- because I don't call for such sanctions for anyone). The Mail & Guardian article did not discuss the fate of the original possessor of the marijuana. I would like to know whether Sanchez arrested him or her, and if so what the outcome was. That said, losing his job is probably enough (even if by resignation), and as I said I agree that 9-1-1 calls over drug overdose scares should not lead to criminal prosecution, for reasons of public health policy. Update: Mark Hemingway commented on this story guest blogging for The Agitator too. In descending order of harshness toward the officer: Hemingway, me, Merritt. Another update: Orin Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy found audio of the 9-1-1- call.
Pain Update -- Dr. Maynard
Joe Califano -- He's Still Around, With a New Book...
California Overdose Prevention Bill is Moving Forward
Prescription Monitoring Programs
Is It Bad Cop vs. Bad Cop, or Bad Cop vs. Good Cop?
What does a jury glean from all this? That all the cops were dirty, or that one cop who got caught is trying to save himself by selling out a clean cop who worked with him?... Does a dirty cop really sell out a clean cop? Or does he, caught in the headlights, just spread the blame to others as dirty as him, in hopes of a shorter sentence?This sort of deal is made all the time, of course, on countless routine cases. I consider it to be a fundamental corruption of the administration of justice -- it is just too obviously true that one cannot trust testimony given under such a circumstance. The older type of practice is that deals would be offered to informants who provide useful information that investigators can use to then find actual evidence. Instead, drug war prosecutors, with the complicity of judges, have shed their morality and instead use the informants' mere testimony. Hmm, maybe that's one of the reasons some people don't like snitching.
Hip Hop Star Releases Anti-Rockefeller Drug Law Video for Forthcoming Documentary
Maryland Action Alert -- Drug Sentencing Reform Bill Unexpectedly in Danger of Veto
Last month a modest but important sentencing reform bill -- HB 992, which restores parole eligibility for second-time drug offenders -- was passed by the Maryland General Assembly. At the time Gov. O'Malley had indicated that he supported the bill. But now he has flip-flopped and is saying he may veto it.
Please call O'Malley's office and demand he stop playing politics with people's lives and sign HB 992. Mandatory minimums are a terrible injustice and are costly and ineffective public policy -- HB 922 is simply a no-brainer. CALL (800) 811-8336, OR FAX O'MALLEY A LETTER AT (410) 974-3275. (The address to use on your letter if writing is: The Honorable Martin O'Malley, State House, Annapolis, Maryland 21401-1925 -- be sure to use fax, though, there isn't enough time to rely on the US mail.) PLEASE FORWARD THIS ALERT TO YOUR FRIENDS IN MARYLAND TOO!!!
The organization Stop the Drug War (DRCNet) has a form set up online to make it easy to e-mail the governor -- I hope you will use this method too. Phone calls and individual faxed letters are the best, though, so if you can do one of those I hope you will. Please send me an e-mail, and send one to [email protected] to let me and DRCNet know you've taken action. Following is some background on HB 992, from the Justice Policy Institute:
When enacted, HB 992 would operate as follows:
- HB 992 does not apply to violent offenders. HB 992 does not apply to third or fourth time offenders. HB 992 does not apply to volume dealers or drug kingpins.
- A defendant is convicted of possession of intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance or distribution of a controlled dangerous substance. The defendant is a second-time offender and is subject to a 10-year mandatory sentence.
- At sentencing, the judge will have available a presentence investigation report (PSI), prepared by Parole and Probation, that details the defendant's complete criminal history (arrests, convictions, warrants, etc.), family history, drug addiction and treatment (or lack thereof) history, and a recommended sentence range based on the defendant's offender score and offense. The judge will hear from defense counsel and the state's attorney concerning a sentence.
- The defendant will be sentenced to 10 years of incarceration. If the defendant is not also guilty of a violent offense, the judge, after a full appraisal of the defendant and listening to argument and recommendations of the state's attorney and defense counsel, MAY sentence to 10 years with the POSSIBILITY of parole.
- The defendant is confined within the Department of Corrections and waits a minimum of two and a half years for a parole hearing.
- The parole commission then determines, based on the defendant's updated presentence investigation report (PSI), offense, offender score, impact statements, a letter from the state's attorney that originally prosecuted the case, and the defendant's "base file" -- i.e., complete institutional record prepared by a case manager detailing tickets, classes, work history, etc., and whether the inmate has an exit plan -- i.e. a job and place to live -- whether to parole the inmate.
- If the inmate is paroled (which is unlikely on the first attempt) and complies with the conditions of his or her parole, the state saves approximately $100,000 and public safety is not impacted.
- If the inmate is paroled (again, unlikely on the first attempt), the inmate is subject to supervised probation and, if the inmate fails to comply with his or her parole conditions, faces serving the entire balance of the 10-year sentence.
While HB 992 by no means does all we would want, it is a beginning. I hope you will take action -- thanks for helping us help Maryland's nonviolent drug offenders this year.