UNDER PRESSURE FROM U.S. ATTORNEYS, APPEALS COURT AGREES TO REVISIT DRUG LAW

SAN FRANCISCO A federal appeals court agreed Friday to revisit a ruling
that found it unconstitutional for judges to add time to drug traffickers'
sentences after a jury conviction.

The August ruling wiped out a major drug-sentencing statute created during
the Reagan administration's war against drugs, and it could ultimately
affect thousands of cases in nine Western states.

The court agreed to rehear the three-judge panel's decision with 11 judges
and set oral arguments for Sept. 29. Every federal public defender in the
circuit covering the nine western states opposed the rehearing.

A narcotics conviction for trafficking carries up to 20 years in most
narcotics cases. With the 1984 law, a judge could extend that sentence up
to life in prison if large quantities of drugs were involved.

But in August, the judges found the law unconstitutional because it allowed
a judge, rather than a jury, to set prison sentences.

The case involved Calvin Buckland, who received a 27-year sentence for
possessing 17 pounds of methamphetamine. The three-judge panel found that
because the jury was not asked to find the quantity of drugs seized, the
judge could not automatically increase Buckland's sentence by seven years
based on his own conclusions.

The decision covers federal drug prosecutions in California, Nevada,
Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Alaska and Hawaii.