ALBANY REACHES DEAL TO REPEAL '70S-ERA DRUG LAWS

ALBANY - Gov. David A. Paterson and New York legislative leaders have
reached an agreement to dismantle much of what remains of the state's
strict 1970s-era drug laws, once among the toughest in the nation.

The deal would repeal many of the mandatory minimum prison sentences
now in place for lower-level drug felons, giving judges the authority
to send first-time nonviolent offenders to treatment instead of prison.

The plan would also expand drug treatment programs and widen the
reach of drug courts at a cost of at least $50 million.

New York's drug sentencing laws, imposed during a heroin epidemic
that was devastating urban areas nearly four decades ago, helped spur
a nationwide trend toward mandatory sentences in drug crimes. But as
many other states moved to roll back the mandatory minimum sentences
in recent years, New York kept its laws on the books, leaving
prosecutors with the sole discretion of whether offenders could be
sent to treatment.

"We're putting judges in the position to determine sentences based on
the facts of a case, and not on mandatory minimum sentences," said
Jeffrion L. Aubry, an assemblyman from Queens who has led the effort
for repeal.

"To me, that is the restoration of justice."

The agreement, which requires approval in the Assembly and the
Senate, would allow some drug offenders who are currently in prison
to apply to have their sentences commuted. It was not clear on
Wednesday how many current prisoners would be eligible to apply. Mr.
Paterson has pushed to have fewer prisoners than legislative leaders
would prefer.

While a few points, like a resentencing provision and the amount the
state is willing to spend on the plan, were still being negotiated
late Wednesday, lawmakers said they were on track to wipe out the
central elements of laws that have been criticized for decades as
overly punitive and disproportionately harmful to minorities.

The laws, passed in 1973, are commonly known as the Rockefeller drug
laws because they were championed by Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller in
what was considered a bold response to the sharp rise in heroin use
and property crimes among young people.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Paterson, Marissa Shorenstein, said reaching
the deal, which she stressed was still being forged, was a personal
victory for the governor, who has made drug law reform a priority of
his administration. When he was a state senator, Mr. Paterson was
arrested in 2002 at a demonstration outside Gov. George E. Pataki's
Midtown Manhattan office protesting the drug laws.

The reforms, Ms. Shorenstein said, "reflect the governor's core
principle to focus on treatment rather than punishment to end the
cycle of addiction."

Under the plan, judges would have the authority to send first-time
nonviolent offenders in all but the most serious drug offenses -
known as A-level drug felonies - to treatment. As a condition of
being sent to treatment, offenders would have to plead guilty. If
they did not successfully complete treatment, their case would go
back before a judge, who would again have the option of imposing a
prison sentence.

Currently, judges are bound by a sentencing structure that requires
minimum sentences of one year for possessing small amounts of cocaine
or heroin, for example. Under the agreement reached by the governor
and lawmakers, a judge could order treatment for those offenders.

Judges would also have the option of sending some repeat drug
offenders to treatment. Repeat offenders accused of more serious drug
crimes, however, could only go to treatment if they were found to be
drug-dependent in an evaluation.

District attorneys have resisted an overhaul of the state's drug
sentencing laws, arguing that the system in place has led to lower
drug crime rates and allowed more drug criminals to enter treatment.

"The prison population is going down and public safety has improved,
and I'd hate to do anything that would upset either of those trends,"
said Michael C. Green, the district attorney of Monroe County, which
includes Rochester. "No one knows for sure, but logic seems to
dictate that is certainly one of the possibilities."

In 2004, the state eliminated the life sentences some drug crimes
carried as a maximum punishment and reduced the length of other drug
sentences. But advocates said those changes did not go nearly far
enough because they left judges bound to mandatory sentencing.

Since then, the Assembly, which is dominated by Democrats, has
routinely passed legislation that repealed mandatory minimum
sentences for many drug crimes. But the bills always failed to get
past the Senate, which was controlled by Republicans until January.

Passing drug law revisions would give Senate Democrats a significant
legislative victory at a time when Republicans are hammering them,
saying they are disorganized and ineffective.

Senator Eric T. Schneiderman, a Manhattan Democrat who has led the
effort in the Senate to overhaul the drug statutes, said he was
confident he had support in the Senate to pass the plan.

"It's no secret the Senate's old majority was the primary barrier to
reforming our drug laws," he said. "But this is one of the reasons we
fought so hard to take the majority. This is what our supporters have
expected us to do."

The deal comes as the state is facing a $16 billion budget deficit
for the coming fiscal year. And finding the money needed to pay for
drug addiction programs, which could reach near $80 million, will
prove difficult, those involved in the negotiations said.

But in the long run, the changes are expected to save money because
sending offenders to treatment is less expensive than spending
$45,000 a year to keep them confined.

New York already has one of the most extensive drug-treatment
networks in the country. Drug policy experts said that with the
proposed changes in the law, the state could have the sentencing
policy it needs to fully utilize those treatment programs.

"New York could actually become a national leader," said Gabriel
Sayegh of the Drug Policy Alliance, a national group that urges
relaxation of certain drug sentencing laws. "We're going in a public
health direction here. We're making that turn, and that's what's significant."