COURT TO REVIEW COCAINE SENTENCING CASE

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court agreed Monday to review whether
judges are required to impose dramatically longer sentences for crack
cocaine than for cocaine powder, stepping into a long-running dispute
with racial overtones.

Most crack cocaine offenders in federal courts are black.

The justices said they would hear the case of Derrick Kimbrough in
the fall. Kimbrough, who is black and a veteran of the first war with
Iraq in 1991, received a 15-year prison term for dealing both crack
and powder cocaine, as well as possessing a firearm in Norfolk, Va.

That was shorter than the federal sentencing guidelines that called
for a range of 19 to 22 years in prison.

At Kimbrough's sentencing hearing, U.S. District Judge Raymond A.
Jackson said the higher range was "ridiculous."

"This case is another example of how the crack cocaine guidelines are
driving the offense level to a point higher than is necessary to do
justice in this case," Jackson said.

The judge said the 15-year sentence "is clearly long enough under the
circumstances. As a matter of fact, it's the court's view that it's
too long, but the court is bound by the mandatory minimums of 10
years on three of these counts."

The government appealed the sentence. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals in Richmond said judges are not free to impose sentences
shorter than the guidelines "based on a disagreement with the
sentencing disparity for crack and powder cocaine offenses."

The Bush administration urged the high court to reject Kimbrough's
appeal. The administration also has opposed changes in crack
sentencing laws, saying any changes should be part of a comprehensive
look at sentencing issues.

Advocates for reducing the disparity point to crime statistics that
show crack is more of an urban and minority drug while cocaine powder
is used more often by the affluent. They say harsher penalties for
crack cocaine unfairly punish blacks.

More than four-fifths of crack cocaine offenders in federal courts
last year were black, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. By
contrast, just over a quarter of those convicted of powder cocaine
crimes last year were black, the commission said.

The issue grew out of a 1986 law that was passed in response to
violent crimes committed to get money to feed crack habits. The law
includes what critics have called the 100-to-1 disparity: Trafficking
in 5 grams of cocaine carries a mandatory five-year prison sentence,
but it takes 500 grams of cocaine powder to warrant the same sentence.

The sentencing commission, an independent agency within the U.S.
judiciary, voted last month to reduce the recommended sentencing
ranges for people convicted of crack possession, a step toward
lessening the disparity. The recommendation will become effective
Nov. 1 unless Congress acts.

At the same time, the commission urged Congress to repeal the
mandatory prison term for simple possession and increase the amount
of crack required to trigger obligatory five-year or more prison
terms as a way to focus on major drug traffickers.

The issue was given a boost by the Supreme Court's decision in 2005
to render the sentencing guidelines advisory instead of mandatory.
The guidelines were adopted in the 1980s to ensure comparable
sentences for similar crimes from courtroom to courtroom.

But the court ruled that a person's constitutional right to a jury
trial was violated when judges, acting alone, considered factors
spelled out in the guidelines to add years to a prison sentence.

The court said sentences must be reasonable and left it to appeals
courts to define that term. The vast majority of sentences remain
within the guidelines.

The 4th Circuit said a sentence outside the guidelines range is
presumed to be unreasonable when it is based on disagreement over the
crack cocaine disparity.

Kimbrough's case will allow the high court to consider a judge's
discretion in such cases.

The case is Kimbrough v. U.S., 06-6330.