The Supreme Court gave federal judges latitude yesterday to impose shorter prison terms for crack cocaine-related crimes, part of a pair of decisions that allow judges, who were once tightly controlled by mandatory guidelines, to exercise broad discretion in sentencing.
The high court's decision arrived ahead of a vote today by the U.S. Sentencing Commission, which will decide whether such sentences should be reconsidered. If so, it could mean reduced federal prison time for up to 19,500 inmates nationwide, including 279 in Maryland, according to the commission.
In yesterday's ruling, the court found that a 15-year sentence given to Derrick Kimbrough, a black military veteran from Norfolk, Va., was permissible even though federal sentencing guidelines for trafficking crack called for a substantially longer stint behind bars.
Opponents have long argued that the tougher sentences for crack-related crimes unjustly target poor blacks, who are more likely to use and sell the drug. Whites, on the other hand, are more likely to possess the costlier powder form of cocaine.
"I think it's a watershed decision in drug sentencing. For two decades we've seen an escalation in the prison population because of harsh drug sentences. The court has signaled a change in course," said Graham Boyd, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Drug Law Reform Project.
An accompanying ruling yesterday could have even broader implications, legal experts said, because it concluded that judges generally should be able to impose a sentence below the once-required range, whether it involves crack or other types of offenses.
"I think that the practical effect is that judges now will feel emboldened to look at all of the factors equally in imposing a sentence that they deem to be `reasonable,'" said Gregg Bernstein, a Baltimore criminal defense attorney who practices in federal court.
Both rulings came down by a vote of 7-2, with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissenting.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion in the second case, which involved a University of Iowa student Ecstasy drug dealer sentenced below recommended guidelines. Stevens told federal appeals courts to give greater deference when reviewing the sentences of lower court judges.
Potential windfall
