JUDGE WOLF RAPS FOCUS ON GUNS, DRUGS IN US DOCKET

A federal judge yesterday accused the US attorney's office in Massachusetts
of spending too much time on drug and gun cases that belong in state court,
instead of focusing on federal crimes such as public corruption and
white-collar offenses that he said would have a greater impact on society.

US District Judge Mark L. Wolf, in an unusually frank discussion with
reporters, said his fundamental problem is with the type of cases being
brought by federal prosecutors under US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan "and
the fact that they are being brought, in my view, at the expense of
important federal cases that it would take a lot of hard work to develop."

Wolf, who made his remarks during a monthly session sponsored by Chief US
District Judge William G. Young and in a follow-up interview, said US
District Court in Boston is flooded with cases that have been developed by
state and local police but are brought in federal court, where defendants
face longer prison terms if convicted.

"When federal prosecutors are preoccupied with presenting cases that have
been investigated by state and local agencies, there's a real opportunity
cost, and it means they're not doing the longer term, grand jury-type
investigations which are likely to get the bigger and morally more culpable
people," Wolf said.

Although Wolf just finished presiding over the carjacking and murder trial
of Gary Lee Sampson, who became the first person in Massachusetts sentenced
to die under the federal death penalty, he repeatedly stressed that he
wasn't talking about the Sampson case and that his criticism wasn't related
to that case.

Stung by Wolf's criticism, Sullivan said that the judge is "simply wrong"
and should focus on his own job, instead of worrying about Sullivan's.

"He obviously believes that he could do a much better job managing the
office," Sullivan said. "But the fact of the matter is that's not his job,
it's mine.

"I would disagree with his characterization of the office," the US attorney
said. "He just doesn't have accurate information."

It was not the first time that Wolf and Sullivan have sparred over how the
US attorney's office is run.

In November 2002, Wolf ordered Sullivan to appear in his courtroom to
respond to allegations that prosecutors had either failed to turn over
evidence to defense lawyers in criminal cases or had belatedly done so.

Wolf is the only federal judge in Boston to order the US attorney to appear
before him. He has done so three times, with Sullivan and two of his
predecessors.

In the 2002 case, Sullivan was miffed because he was at the dentist when he
learned that Wolf had ordered his presence in his courtroom an hour later.
Wolf threatened to hold Sullivan in contempt when he didn't show up. He did
appear the following week.

Yesterday, Wolf said his comments were not directed solely at Sullivan, who
was appointed US attorney by Attorney General John D. Ashcroft in the fall
of 2001. Wolf acknowledged that federal prosecutors first started bringing
state drug and gun cases into federal courts in the late 1980s, as part of
a national initiative to target urban violence.

But Wolf said the trend has become a problem as it has escalated in recent
years, with more cases involving low-level drug dealers.

"Drug crimes are very serious; they destroy the lives of individuals,
families, and communities," he said. "I'm not suggesting that these crimes
are unimportant. But it's never been the case in this country that people
felt that every case that was important should be a federal case, and the
federal courts have limited resources."

Wolf, a deputy US attorney and chief of the public corruption unit under US
Attorney William F. Weld from 1981 to 1985, said he decided to go public
with his concerns because he has a reverence for the US Department of
Justice and because he believes it should do better.

He worked in Washington for the Justice Department in the 1970s, first as
special assistant to the US deputy attorney general and then as special
assistant to the US attorney general.

Wolf said he was upset that federal judges have been portrayed as "soft on
crime," leading to the Feeney Amendment, which Congress passed last year to
require the US Sentencing Commission to keep records of judges who sentence
defendants to less time than called for under federal sentencing guidelines.

"The federal judges are not soft on crime, but there are a lot of federal
judges who know what a real federal crime is," said Wolf. "We deal with the
cases that are brought to us."

In January, Wolf said he sentenced a Cape Cod woman convicted of heroin
charges to two years in prison, three months less than called for under
sentencing guidelines, because she suffered from bipolar disorder, was a
heroin addict, and had a history of other problems. He said he was
disturbed that a Rhode Island man who supplied heroin to the Cape Cod ring
was not indicted, even though he had been identified.

At that sentencing, Wolf said: "It's entirely up to the Department of
Justice to decide how to devote its limited resources. But it's up to every
citizen to make a judgment as to whether those choices are being made in a
way that really serves the public interest."

Now, because of the Feeney Amendment and the Justice Department's
aggressive strategy in appealing sentences in which the judge departed from
federal sentencing guidelines, Wolf said it is possible that a federal
prosecutor will spend time appealing a three-month sentencing disparity,
instead of chasing the drug ring's supplier.

Sullivan said no decision has been made on whether to appeal the heroin
addict's sentence.

Sullivan said the crime-fighting strategy employed by federal prosecutors
today is much different from what it was when Wolf worked in the US
attorney's office 20 years ago. He said Ashcroft has asked all of the
nation's US attorneys to develop strategies to reduce gun violence in their
districts, an approach they believe has helped reduce violent crime.

"We can't turn our backs on neighborhoods because a judge believes we
shouldn't be prosecuting these cases," Sullivan said. "Congress decides
what conduct is a federal crime. We decide which cases we're going to bring
federally."

Sullivan also insisted that his office's efforts in targeting drugs and
guns have not kept his prosecutors from bringing significant organized
crime, white collar, and antiterrorism cases. He noted that the office's
health-care fraud unit is nationally acclaimed.

Sullivan said he doesn't criticize the federal judiciary, even though he
believes there are things the court could do differently and "much more
efficiently."