GIVE JUDGES DISCRETION IN DRUG-CASE SENTENCING

"Dealing with drugs: Counterpoint'' (May 16), by Onondaga County District
Attorney William Fitzpatrick, requires a response to correct one basic
misconception.

The article criticizes those who would call for repeal of the Rockefeller
drug laws, laws I supported as the majority leader of the Senate when they
were enacted.

However, the article written by John Dunne, which states the position of
the Campaign for Effective Criminal Justice, calls not for repeal, but for
meaningful, balanced reform of those laws.

Basically, the amendments to the law propose to give sentencing discretion
back to judges so they may appropriately target nonviolent drug-addicted
offenders, who pose no danger to public safety, and divert them to
treatment rather than to prison.

This is a far more effective way of reducing drug offenses, as demonstrated
by drug-treatment diversion programs across the state, including one in
Onondaga County cited by Mr. Fitzpatrick.

Our position is that judges, in consultation with prosecutors, ought to be
making these sentencing decisions, as judges are best suited to objectively
review each case and determine which offenders should be sent to prison or
to a drug-treatment program.

Unquestionably, how the criminal justice system deals with nonviolent drug
offenders is a public safety issue.

Our contention is simply that public safety will be enhanced by giving
judges the flexibility to place nonviolent drug offenders in cost-effective
drug-treatment programs.

Warren M. Anderson
Binghamton

The writer is former state Senate majority leader