PANEL MAY CUT SENTENCES FOR CRACK

Thousands Could Be Released Early

An independent panel is considering reducing the sentences of inmates
incarcerated in federal prisons for crack cocaine offenses, which
would make thousands of people immediately eligible to be freed.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission, which sets guidelines for federal
prison sentences, established more lenient guidelines this spring for
future crack cocaine offenders. The panel is scheduled to consider
today a proposal to make the new guidelines retroactive.

Should the panel adopt the new policy, the sentences of 19,500
inmates would be reduced by an average of 27 months. About 3,800
inmates now imprisoned for possession and distribution of crack
cocaine could be freed within the next year, according to the
commission's analysis. The proposal would cover only inmates in
federal prisons and not those in state correctional facilities, where
the vast majority of people convicted of drug offenses are held.

By far the largest number -- more than 1,400 -- of those who would be
eligible for sentence reductions were convicted in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, which has jurisdiction
over Northern Virginia and the Richmond area, according to an
analysis done by the commission. Nearly 280 inmates convicted in
federal courts in Maryland would be eligible, as well as almost 270
prisoners found guilty in the District of Columbia.

The commission is taking up one of the most racially sensitive issues
of the two-decades-old war on drugs. Jurists and civil rights
organizations have long complained that the commission's guidelines
mandate more stringent federal penalties for crack cocaine offenses,
which usually involve African Americans, than for crimes involving
powder cocaine, which generally involve white people. The chemical
properties of the drugs are the same, though crack is potentially
more addictive.

Nearly 86 percent of inmates who would be affected by the change are
black; slightly fewer than 6 percent are white. Ninety-four percent are men.

The commission's proposal does not change sentencing recommendations
for powder cocaine.

Created in 1984 to bring more consistency to sentencing in federal
courts, the commission has reduced sentences and made such decisions
retroactive for offenses involving LSD, marijuana cultivation and the
painkiller OxyContin. But none involved such a large number of
inmates or so controversial a drug, or have had such racial implications.

The Bush administration opposes the new plan, arguing that it would
overburden federal courts and release potentially dangerous drug
offenders. In a letter to the commission, Assistant Attorney General
Alice S. Fisher wrote that the release of a large number of drug
offenders "would jeopardize community safety and threatens to unravel
the success we have achieved in removing violent crack offenders from
high-crime neighborhoods."

But many federal judges, public defenders, parole officers and civil
rights advocates favor the move, asserting that the penalties for
crack cocaine charges have fallen disproportionately onto black people.

"Making the amendment retroactive will . . . help repair the image of
the sentencing guidelines in communities of color," NAACP Chairman
Julian Bond wrote to the commission. "It is cruel and arbitrary to
fix this injustice for some, but not for others, solely because of
the date they were sentenced."

Congress has the power to overturn the proposal, but it is unclear
whether it will do so. Lawmakers had 180 days to reverse the
commission's May 1 decision to effect more lenient sentences for
individuals convicted in some crack-related offenses, and they took
no action. Those changes in the guidelines took effect Nov. 1.

The commission, an agency in the judicial branch, consists of seven
voting members, nominated by the president and confirmed by the
Senate. (The attorney general and the chairman of the U.S. Parole
Commission are nonvoting members.) Three commissioners must be
federal judges. Four current members were named by President Bush;
the rest were tapped by President Bill Clinton in 1999.

In part, because of crack's relatively cheap price, most offenders
are poor black people. As a result, some civil libertarians cite
sentencing discrepancies as one reason for the explosion in the
number of African Americans -- especially men -- behind bars.

Testifying before Congress earlier this year, the chairman of the
sentencing commission, Ricardo H. Hinojosa, implored lawmakers to
ease the crack guidelines. He said the racial differences between
users of crack and powder cocaine created an unwarranted judicial disparity.

If the plan for retroactive reductions is adopted, inmates serving
time for certain crack offenses can petition a judge for a hearing on
whether they can be freed as a result of having their sentences
reduced. A judge's decision can be appealed.

Richard L. Delonis, national president of the National Association of
Assistant U.S. Attorneys, warned that retroaction would burden
prosecutors and overwhelm U.S. marshals, who would have to resettle
prisoners into halfway houses.

Among those challenging that argument are the committee on criminal
law for the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Florida
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Robert W. Pratt, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Iowa, said assertions that retroaction will
result in "an avalanche of motions . . . are exaggerated." He added:
"The courts' workloads should not stand in the way of achieving
sentences in 'crack' cocaine cases that are proportionate, fair and
serve the interests of justice."

Inmates who might benefit from the reductions include Lamont and
Lawrence Garrison, African American twins and graduates of Howard
University who were sent to prison for 19 years and 15 years,
respectively, for distributing crack cocaine.

Lamont Garrison's sentence could be reduced by four years and his
brother's by three years if the guidelines become retroactive, said
Monica Pratt Raffanel, a spokeswoman for Families Against Mandatory
Minimums, an advocacy group that has lobbied for changes to the
sentencing guidelines.

"They've been gone for almost 10 years, and the crack in the door
with this little change is good," said Karen Garrison, the twins'
mother. "As far as the retroactivity, part of it is not to think
nothing until I see it. They still have to go back to court. It's not
as easy as it seems if it does become retroactive. You just have to
do the right thing and hope you get something back."