U.S. ATTORNEY SEEKS SENTENCING LEGISLATION

One of Oklahoma's top federal prosecutors urged Wednesday a prompt
legislative response to a U.S. Supreme Court decision upending two decades
of federal sentencing guidelines.

Jan. 12, the Supreme Court made guidelines that Congress approved in 1984
advisory instead of mandatory.

Without further congressional action, the advisory guidelines will lead to
differing punishments for the same crime and hinder investigations into
"drug trafficking, gangs, corporate fraud and terrorism offenses," U.S.
Attorney Robert G. McCampbell said in written testimony submitted to the
U.S. Sentencing Commission and e-mailed to The Oklahoman.

McCampbell, who is the head prosecutor for the U.S. Western District of
Oklahoma, submitted written testimony and answered questions from the
commission, made up of seven presidential appointees. The commission
establishes federal sentencing practices and advises Congress.

McCampbell also is chairman of the U.S. attorney general's advisory
subcommittee on sentencing.

Others offering testimony before the commission did not hold McCampbell's
view on the need for prompt action. The American Bar Association
recommended a one-year waiting period before taking legislative action.

"The commission should not support or propose legislative solutions for
problems that may not exist," said Jon Sands, chairman of the Federal
Defender Sentencing Guidelines Committee, in testimony published on the
commission's Web site.

The Supreme Court found the mandatory system unconstitutional because it
allowed federal judges to add time to a defendant's sentence for factors
not pleaded to or found by a jury.

About a week later, the Supreme Court ordered appeals courts to reconsider
more than 400 sentences in light of the ruling.

About 50 people convicted in Oklahoma City will be resentenced, McCampbell
estimated.