Court to Clarify Drug Crime Rule

By Laurie Asseo
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) The Supreme Court today agreed to clarify the rules for
sentencing people convicted of federal drug crimes when a single conspiracy
charge involves more than one type of drug.

The court said it will hear arguments by five Illinois men who say they
should get shorter prison terms when one charge involves multiple drugs
that ordinarily call for differing sentences. Alternatively, the men seek a
new trial.

Vincent Edwards, Reynolds A. Wintersmith, Horace Joiner, Karl V. Fort and
Joseph Tidwell were charged in June 1993 with being part of a drugselling
conspiracy based in Rockford, Ill.

A jury convicted all five of a single charge of conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute the powder and crack forms of cocaine. Under federal
sentencing guidelines, sentences are much tougher for people convicted of
possessing crack cocaine than the powder variety.

Fort and Wintersmith were sentenced to life in prison, while the other
three were given prison sentences ranging from 10 years to 26 years.

On appeal, the five argued they should have been given shorter sentences
based on a powder cocaine offense because it was unclear whether the jury
found them guilty of possessing powder or crack cocaine.

But the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld their sentences last
January. It is up to the judge, not the jury, to decide what drugs were
involved and in what amount, the appeals court said.

The appeal acted on today contended that at least five other federal
appeals courts have ruled that when someone is convicted of a single
conspiracy charge involving multiple drugs, they must receive the lesser of
the possible sentences or get a new trial.

Justice Department lawyers said the 7th Circuit court ruled correctly but
urged the justices to grant review and resolve the conflicting rulings in
lower courts.

The case is Edwards vs. U.S., 968732.

© Copyright 1997 The Associated Press