Leading the Way to Repeal of the Rockefeller Drug Laws!  Read the History of the Movement Below

The latest  relevant news on the  Rockefeller Drug war in NYS and the stinging op-ed's and letters by Anthony Papa on criminal justice issues

Did you know that the 2 watered down changes in the Rockefeller laws has equated to less than 350 prisoners set free of the 1,000 prisoners that were eligible for relief.

without freedom, reform is meaningless!!!!

______________________

Flash!   Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program  Must Go!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-papa/anti-drug-task-force-fund_b_99219.html

Huffington Post   by Anthony Papa

Anti-Drug Task Force Funding Leads to Police Corruption and Destruction of Lives

Posted April 29, 2008

In early March, a federally-funded narcotics task force struggling to increase its fiscal support carried out a crime sweep in 41 states. The sweep resulted in 4,200 arrests, with police seizing large amounts of cocaine, marijuana and methamphetamine. Why a massive raid? Was it the aim of the task force to eliminate street narcotics in the name of a drug-free society? Nope. The cops were merely trying to protect their bottom line.

The operation, called the "Byrne Blitz," was carried out, mostly, to show the importance of the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program. Byrne grants fund more than 4,000 police officers and prosecutors that support 750 drug enforcement task forces in 50 states. Fifty-six Attorneys-General joined twelve law enforcement groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police, to lead the charge for increased funding and gather support on Capitol Hill.The program's funds were drastically reduced by Congress in 2008 to $170 million--more than two-thirds of its 2007 funding and significantly lower than its 2002 budget of nearly $900 million.

The Byrne grant program has its critics, including the White House whose officials were quoted in the New York Times as saying that the program has not demonstrated results. I agree with the White House. In fact, I would take it a step further -- the Byrne program should not be funded at all. Dozens of major scandals exist, showing the pitfalls of the program that has clearly wasted billions of dollars and perpetuated racial disparities, police corruption, and civil rights abuses.

The most notorious example occurred in 1999 in Tulia, TX. Residents of this sleepy Texas town felt a mini version of a "Byrne Blitz" when 46 people were scooped up and arrested in a sting operation funded by the Byrne program. Tom Coleman, an undercover cop, conducted an 18-month, racially motivated sting that eventually earned him the "Outstanding Lawman of the Year" award from the Attorney General of Texas. The drug bust incarcerated almost 15 percent of the black population in Tulia, sentencing them to a total of 750 years in prison. Coleman was eventually discredited and found guilty of perjury. He was sentenced to 10 years probation. Thirty five of those arrested by Coleman were pardoned in 2003 by Texas Gov. Rick Perry and a $5 million settlement from an eventual civil suit was awarded to those arrested in the Texas sting.

In 2002, a report issued by the ACLU of Texas named 17 scandals involving Byrne-funded, anti-drug forces in Texas. The tainted cases were rife with instances of falsifying government records, fabricating evidence and other abuses of power. Recent scandals in other states include the misuse of millions of dollars in federal grant money in Kentucky and Massachusetts, and false convictions based on police perjury in Missouri. The list goes on with additional abuses in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin.

The Byrne grant program has been criticized for wasting tax dollars and failing to reduce crime. Several leading conservative groups, such as the American Conservative Union and Citizens Against Government Waste, have called on Congress to completely eliminate the Byrne program because it has been proven to be an ineffective and inefficient use of resources.

The original intent of the Byrne program was to provide financial support to state and local governments to make communities safe and improve criminal justice systems. This surely is not the case, based on its history of corruption and the destruction of human lives. In this struggling economy, misguided policies from the federal government need to be eliminated, not supported.

Anthony Papa is author of 15 To Life: How I Painted my Way to Freedom, and a communications specialist for Drug Policy Alliance (www.drugpolicy.org).

______________________________

 

Flash:  April 24, 2008:   Assembly Hearings on Rockefeller—May 8 in NYC, May 15 in Rochester

Dear Friends,

 An important development has emerged in the last few days related to the Rockefeller Drug Laws. This email contains important information about this development and some potential next steps. Please read down, including the invitation to a conference call next Wednesday, April 30, at 2 p.m.

 Over the course of the last year, many of us have worked together to advance a public health approach to drug policy in New York. We have generally agreed that getting rid of the failed Rockefeller Drug Laws is not enough—New York needs a coordinated drug policy guided by public health principles, not prison politics.

 The Assembly has heeded our call. On Monday, the Assembly announced an invitation-only hearing held by six Assembly Committees: Codes, Corrections, Judiciary, Health, Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, and Social Services. I don’t know when there has been a six-committee joint hearing in the Assembly before, making this an unprecedented opportunity for us to advance our cause.

We have worked hard over the last many months to develop consensus on a range of critical issues related to real reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. People on this email list represent groups working in ATI’s, re-entry, drug treatment, sentencing reform, direct services, mental health, civil liberties, harm reduction, families and friends of the incarcerated, formerly incarcerated people, community members, and more. We make a remarkable team. The legislation we’ve crafted together will no doubt receive a significant boost as a result of these hearings. And the hearings are an opportunity to transform the way our drug policies are discussed, crafted, implemented, measured and evaluated. I believe this is a real chance for us to re-frame the issue—move it outside of the criminal justice paradigm, and into a public health paradigm. Put another way, this is an opportunity for us to change the game.

 It is important that we all sign up to testify at the committee hearings—and it is equally important that we coordinate our efforts so that our collective message is loud and clear, and that our individual voices can ring strong. Next Wednesday, April 30, we will hold a conference call to discuss the Hearings, coordinate a strategy for our testimonies, and make sure we’re hitting all the right points. Can you join us on the call?

Conference Call
Wednesday, April 30 2 – 3 p.m.  Conference Call in number: 877-306-8255 Conference ID 3297365

 This call will be to:

·         discuss the Assembly hearings

·         coordinate our testimonies, to ensure that the Committee Chairs at the hearings hear about the need for a new paradigm in New York.

·         Identify key action steps for May 8 and May 15, including media messaging.

·         Coordinate follow up steps post-hearings.

 I will be following up with most of you in advance of the call. I imagine there might be many questions, so please feel free to call me directly on my cell phone at 646-335-2264 if you’d like to talk.   ~gabriel sayegh

 Enclosed is the Assembly announcement. The Hearing dates are on Thursday May 8 in NYC—on the 35th anniversary of the Rockefeller Drug Laws—and on May 15 in Rochester.

 

 

 

 

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON CODES

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON CORRECTION

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG ABUSE

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES

 

NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Testimony by Invitation Only

 

SUBJECT:     The Rockefeller Drug Laws – 35 Years Later.

 

PURPOSE:     To explore the impact of the “Rockefeller Drug Laws” on drug addiction, drug-related health problems and drug-related crime; to examine the impact of the 2004 and 2005 reforms of these drug laws in addressing drug abuse and the illegal drug trade; to examine the effectiveness of substance abuse treatment services as an alternative to incarceration and as a means to address offender recidivism; to determine the adequacy and effectiveness of existing substance abuse treatment services and resources; to explore whether the current criminal sentence structure should be continued or whether judges should have additional discretion to divert drug abusers into treatment as an alternative to incarceration; to examine access and barriers to social services for persons with a history of substance abuse released from incarceration.

 

DATE

LOCATION

TIME

 

Thursday, May 8, 2008

Assembly Hearing Room

250 Broadway, Room 1923, 19th Floor

New York, New York

 

10:00 A.M.

 

Thursday, May 15, 2008

City Hall Council Chambers

30 Church St., Room 302-A

Rochester, New York

 

10:30 A.M.

 

May 8, 2008, is the 35th anniversary of the enactment of New York’s “Rockefeller Drug Laws.”   The stated purpose of these laws was to deter the use and sale of drugs by imposing harsh mandatory prison sentences on drug offenders.   There have been a number of amendments to those laws over the years.  Recently, in 2004, New York amended the drug laws recognizing that a drug policy which focused purely on inflexible criminal sanctions was ineffective.  At the time, both the Executive and the Legislature recognized that while significant, the 2004 reforms, as well as a 2005 amendment, represented just a first step towards meaningful reform and that other major changes to the drug laws were urgently needed.  However, since 2004 only the Assembly has passed legislation to further reform New York’s drug laws.   

 

Despite sentencing reforms, large numbers of drug offenders continue to be incarcerated in New York State prisons.  As of January 1, 2008, 13,425 drug offenders were in state prison representing more than 21% of the male prison population and more than 33% of the female population.  Statistics show that a large majority of this population has never been convicted of a violent offense and up to 40% are incarcerated for drug possession rather than for selling drugs.  Notably, the Rockefeller Drug Laws have disproportionately impacted communities of color – more than 90% of all drug offenders in New York State prisons are Black or Latino.  

 

After 35 years of a drug policy focused on punishment with concomitant spending of billions of dollars to put people in prison, the question raised is whether the effort has been worth it and if not, whether New York’s laws should be amended.  Indeed, many argue that it may be time to broaden New York’s approach to addressing drug addiction. 

Unquestionably, drug abuse is a serious public health problem that affects families and almost every community.  Each year, even under the current scheme of drug law enforcement, drug abuse results in an estimated 40 million serious illnesses or injuries in the United States.  Drug addiction is a treatable disease, so among issues raised is whether a system that focuses on  preventing and treating drug addiction rather than simply incarcerating individuals will result in a reduction in the use and sale of drugs – something mandatory imprisonment laws have failed to accomplish.

In addition, another issue raised over the 35 years of experience New York has had under its drug laws is whether authorizing judges to sentence drug-addicted persons convicted of crimes to treatment as an alternative to incarceration would help break the cycle of addiction and crime and make our streets, homes and communities safer.  Furthermore, more effective prison-based drug treatment programs may reduce the rate of recidivism among formerly incarcerated substance abusers and improve their prospects for successful reentry into the community.   Such reforms may also produce significant fiscal savings by reducing correctional costs and the dependence on public assistance dollars thereby allowing the state to invest necessary resources in community-based alternative to incarceration and drug treatment programs.  

This hearing will provide an opportunity to take a fresh look at New York’s drug laws and examine how the criminal justice, social service and health systems treat drug abusers.   

Persons wishing to present pertinent testimony to the Committees at the joint public hearing should complete and return the enclosed reply form as soon as possible.  It is important that the reply form be fully completed and returned so that persons may be notified in the event of emergency postponement or cancellation.

Oral testimony will be accepted by invitation only and limited to ten (10) minutes’ duration.  In preparing the order of witnesses, the Committees will attempt to accommodate individual requests to speak at particular times in view of special circumstances.  These requests should be made on the attached reply form or communicated to the Committees’ staff as early as possible. 

Twenty (20) copies of any prepared testimony should be submitted at the hearing registration desk.  The Committees would appreciate advance receipt of prepared statements. In order to further publicize these hearings, please inform interested parties and organizations of the Committees’ interest in receiving testimony from all sources.

In order to meet the needs of those who may have a disability, the Assembly, in accordance with its policy of non-discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), has made its facilities and services available to all individuals with disabilities.  For individuals with disabilities, accommodations will be provided, upon reasonable request, to afford such individuals access and admission to Assembly facilities and activities.

 

 

JOSEPH R. LENTOL

Member of Assembly

Chair, Committee on Codes

HELENE E. WEINSTEIN

Member of Assembly

Chair, Committee on Judiciary

JEFFRION L. AUBRY

Member of Assembly

Chair, Committee on Correction

RICHARD N. GOTTFRIED

Member of Assembly

Chair, Committee on Health

FELIX ORTIZ

Member of Assembly

Chair, Committee on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse

KEITH L. T. WRIGHT

Member of Assembly

Chair, Committee on Social Services

SELECTED ISSUES TO WHICH WITNESSES MAY DIRECT THEIR TESTIMONY:

 

1.      Has New York’s drug policy over the last 35 years reduced drug use, drug-related health problems, and drug-related criminal behavior?  If not, how should it change to more effectively reduce drug addiction and related problems?

 

2.      Are mandatory sentences of imprisonment an effective part of a drug policy strategy?  Should judges have discretion to sentence class B or above drug offenders and second felony drug offenders to drug treatment programs as an alternative to incarceration?  Would expanding the number of drug offenders eligible for court ordered drug abuse treatment as a potential alternative to incarceration help break the cycle of addiction and crime and make our streets, homes and communities safer? 

 

3.      How many drug courts are currently operating in the state?  Are there sufficient community-based treatment programs available to serve individuals participating in the drug court program?  How are the community-based programs utilized by drug courts funded and what additional resources, if any, are necessary? What changes, if any, should New York’s court system make to better address drug abuse and drug abuse related crime?

 

4.      What role should prosecutors and judges play in determining which offenders are diverted into alternative to incarceration programs?

 

5.      How effective is substance abuse treatment at reducing the rate of recidivism among persons convicted of crimes?  What kinds of programs, supervision and resources would most effectively reduce the incidence of drug use and drug-related crime? 

 

6.      How effective have existing programs (for example, Drug Treatment Alternatives to Prison and “Road to Recovery”) been in addressing substance abuse and dependency?  Are there other prosecutor-sponsored and non-prosecutor sponsored initiatives that are as, or more effective? 

 

7.      What substance abuse treatment services exist within New York State’s prisons and jails and do they sufficiently meet the needs of inmates with a history of drug and alcohol abuse?

 

8.      What pre-release procedures used by the Department of Correctional Services and the Division of Parole help ensure successful community integration of persons released from prison who have a history of substance abuse?  What steps are taken to ensure that there is a continuity of treatment between prison and community substance abuse treatment?

 

9.      What substance abuse treatment programs and resources are currently available in the community for persons released from jail and prison, and do they adequately meet the needs of the tens of thousands of persons released from jail and prison in New York each year?

 

10.  What are the barriers faced by formerly incarcerated individuals with a history of substance abuse in obtaining public benefits, medical assistance, and affordable, suitable and stable housing?    Is specific legislation needed to improve the process and assist these individuals in applying for and obtaining public benefits?   Are employment, training, and/or educational programs available through local Departments of Social Services for formerly incarcerated individuals with a history of substance abuse? What impact do such programs have on drug abuse relapse and recidivism? What can be done to improve employment and training opportunities for this population?

 

11.  What is the cost to taxpayers of the current mandatory incarceration laws? Are there potential cost savings that can be derived from diverting more defendants into substance abuse treatment as a potential alternative to incarceration?

 

12.  Two proposals have been offered recently that proponents say are designed to encourage addicted persons to seek treatment.  One would decriminalize the possession of a small, residual amount of a controlled substance in a hypodermic syringe when the syringe is given to an authorized needle exchange program pursuant to section 3381 (1) of the Public Health Law (A.6337).   A second proposal would encourage addicted persons and others to seek emergency assistance for persons seriously ill from a drug overdose (A.8740).  This proposal would restrict the use in criminal court of evidence concerning the possession of a controlled substance when such evidence is obtained as a result of the person seeking or receiving health care services.   Are these proposals meritorious? 

_____________________

 

Flash:  March 28, 2008

http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080328/NEWS01/803280350/1002/NEWS01

ALBANY — Advocates at the Capitol Thursday asked lawmakers to overturn the mandatory sentences required by the Rockefeller-era drug laws and instead let judges decide how long offenders should stay in prison.

Under current law, drug offenders are sent to prison when they would benefit more from drug treatment, which would also save the state money, said Robert Gangi, executive director of the Correctional Association.

Would you rather run into a drug user on the street who has been in a treatment facility for the last three years or that has done three years in Attica (prison)?” he said.

Members of the Correctional Association and other groups in the Drop the Rock coalition were among many advocates who took their issues to the Capitol in a last-minute effort to get their agendas reflected in the state budget. Lawmakers are supposed to have a spending plan before the new fiscal year begins — April 1 — but they are behind schedule.

Environmental advocates pushed for passage of the “bigger better bottle bill,” which would require non-carbonated beverages — water and juices — to carry the same 5-cent deposit as soda and beer containers. They also pushed for congestion pricing for New York City — an additional tax on those who drive into parts of Manhattan during peak travel hours during the week. The goal of the measure would be to discourage car use in the city, improve the environment and encourage more to use mass transportation.

Education advocates urged lawmakers to increase the income tax for people who earn $1 million or more a year to help fund the state's education system.

The Rockefeller-era drug laws, enacted in 1973, require long prison terms for the possession or sale of a relatively small amount of drugs, Gangi said.

Drop the Rock members said that reforms to the drug laws in 2004 and 2005 did not go far enough. Prison terms for non-violent offenders who don't buy or sell large amounts of drugs should be shortened, and the state should increase money for drug treatment and other alternatives to incarceration, they said.

There are about 13,400 drug offenders in state prisons at a cost of $500 million per year, or almost $37,000 per inmate per year, Gangi said.

The state should invest in alternative drug treatment, he said.

An outpatient drug treatment service can cost between $2,700 and $4,500 per person per year, and residential drug treatment centers can cost between $17,000 and $21,000 per person per year, Gangi said.

The number of drug offenders in prison is declining, according to the state Department of Correctional Services.

“For the 11th year in a row the number of drug felons under custody has been reduced,” correction department spokeswoman Linda Foglia said. “There were 10,084 fewer drug offenders

under custody than there were in 1996 when the number peaked at 23,511 drug offenders - that's a 43 percent reduction.”

However, there has been a recent spike in newly incarcerated inmates with drug charges, jumping from 5,657 in 2004 to 6,148 in 2007, she said.

Assembly Corrections Committee Chairman Jeffrion Aubry, D-Queens, has proposed a bill that would effectively dissolve the mandatory minimum sentencing laws and replace them with new, suggested sentencing guidelines for judges to follow when sentencing drug offenders.

Sen. Dale Volker, R-Depew, Erie County, said he thinks sentencing guidelines are a good idea but could allow too many dangerous offenders to slip through unpunished. Many drug offenders could benefit more from treatment than jail time, he said.

“I believe in treatment, I believe that we should not send low-level offenders to jail unless under extreme circumstances,” such as if they are repeat offenders, he said.

“Very, very few people go to jail under the Rockefeller Drug Laws,” Volker said, only the biggest drug dealers.

“It is the re-offenders, not the new offenders, that are creating the problems with prisons,” he said.

dosburn@nycap.rr.com

 

 

 

 

Flash:   march 5, 2008  :russell simmons  might finish what he started in 2003

 

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=3&aid=79139

Governor Responds To Hip Hop Moguls Demand For Drug Law Reform

 March 05, 2008

 The governor responded Wednesday to some very heated language used by hip hop mogul Russell Simmons to describe his stance on the Rockefeller drug laws. Speaking out on NY1's "Inside City Hall" Tuesday, Simmons said Eliot Spitzer is failing to live up to promises to reform the state's strict drug laws. Political reporter Josh Robin filed the following report. “I'm very disappointed in the governor. I should say that the hip hop is getting ready to get in his ass,” Russell Simmons said on Tuesday night’s “Inside City Hall.”

 

Simmons says Governor Eliot Spitzer as a candidate talked a good game about reforming the Rockefeller drug laws. But 14 months after inauguration, some feel cheated. "He promised all of us that he would do something about this prison reform issue,” said Simmons.

 The fiery issue is a set of laws among the strictest in the nation, demanding sentences for the sale or possession of drugs. African Americans and Latinos are hit especially hard, making up 91 percent of those behind bars. The laws account for 21 percent of the prison population, costing a half billion dollars a year.

 Running for office, Spitzer impressed advocates. "As a candidate, Eliot Spitzer was enthusiastically in favor of reform of Rockefeller,” said Assemblyman Jeffion Aubry. “I will continue to support efforts to reform these laws," he said in a survey. It’s a position he reiterated Wednesday, but now with a caveat.

 "We're trying to come up with something that is reasoned that will maintain safety. People should not forget, we have seen a dramatic drop in crime over the years in New York State,” said Spitzer. “And that's because – I can say this as a prosecutor – we prosecute crimes, we're tough, we lock up those that are guilty. And so we have to be very measured and reasoned in what we do.”

 A recent spike in the release of violent criminals has Spitzer on the defensive, although aides noted a majority of the parole board's appointees are carryovers from the Pataki administration. Spitzer did set up a commission that recommended in some cases alternatives to prison, but only with the agreement of the court, the defense and the prosecution.

 Some feel no real reforms will happen until the State Senate is stripped of its Republican control – a margin now at just one seat.

 "We're really counting on 2009 when hopefully there will be the leadership in Albany across the board to push for major Rockefeller reform together, with a comprehensive reform of New York's drug policies,” said Ethan Nadelmann of Drug Policy Alliance, an advocacy group against the nation’s war on drugs.

 As for Simmons' remarks, Spitzer still calls him a friend. – Josh Robin

__________________________

 

HUFFINGTON POST   Posted March 4, 2008 | 06:25 PM (EST)

by Anthony Papa

 

Clinton's Crack Cocaine Apology: Too Little Too Late?

 

Does former President Bill Clinton want to become a drug policy reform advocate? On its face, it would seem that way following President Clinton's keynote speech at the University of Pennsylvania last week commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Kerner Commission report that addressed the causes of racial disturbances in the 1960s. Clinton admitted his administration's failure to end the racial disparities in sentencing of powder and crack cocaine offenses. He said he regretted not doing more about it, and that he would be prepared to spend a significant portion of his life trying to make amends.

President Clinton's comments came on the heels of historic changes recently enacted by the U.S. Sentencing Commission that gives judges the ability to retroactively reduce the sentences of 20,000 crack cocaine offenders. The law went into effect on March 4, 2008 when 1,600 offenders became immediately eligible for release and thousands of others would be eligible in years to follow. Criminal penalties for possession and sales of cocaine are severe. But the penalties for crack cocaine are more severe, despite the fact that pharmacologically they are identical. Under federal law, 500 grams of powdered cocaine is equivalent to five grams of crack cocaine. Despite the majority of users being whites or Hispanic, the majority of those incarcerated for crack cocaine crimes are black. The 100-to-1 sentencing disparity has been condemned by a wide array of criminal justice and civil rights groups for its racially discriminatory impact.

Some critics would be quick to say Clinton's statement is nothing more than a political ploy to generate support for his wife's presidential run and his new-found concern is too little too late. I would give Clinton the benefit of the doubt and welcome him to tackle the tough drug policy issues that exist. This includes battling the draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws, which incarcerate a majority of blacks excessively long sentences. Out of the 12,000 or so drug prisoners in the state of New York, 91 percent are black and Latino. It makes sense for him to take interest in this issue since the Clintons live in Chappaqua, New York, not far from two maximum security prisons, Bedford Hills Correctional Facility and Sing Sing. Additionally, Clinton has his office headquartered in Harlem, a community heavily affected by these drug laws.

Clinton should read the recently released report by Pew's Public Safety Performance Project on incarceration rates. It found that one in 15 black adults is incarcerated and also one in nine black men between the ages of 20 and 34 is finding his way into our gulags. Clinton can be a valuable asset to the drug policy reform movement and help dismantle unfair drug laws that waste valuable tax dollars and destroy lives. Let's give him a chance to do right by New York's communities of color.

Anthony Papa is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance Network.

 

 

h

http://timesunion.com/TUNews/author/AuthorPage.aspx?AuthorNum=58

Flash!   Governor Spitzer Grants No Clemencies in 2007!

 

Albany Times Union

Spitzer puts clemency in cooler

Advocates for inmates expected governor to show more compassion

By PAUL GRONDAHL  Staff writer

First published: Saturday, December 29, 2007

ALBANY -- Going against gubernatorial tradition and the practice of his predecessors, Gov. Eliot Spitzer has not granted any executive clemencies this holiday season.

That's prompted criticism from prisoner advocates, who said he missed an opportunity to improve his plummeting approval ratings by showing mercy and letting worthy inmates out of prison early after they've served many years behind bars.

"He's behaving like Ebenezer Scrooge," said Robert Gangi, executive director of the Correctional Association of New York State. "We expected mercy and a big heart from him, with so many prisoners awaiting clemency. It's very disappointing."

A total of 333 of the 63,500 inmates in the state prison system met the requirements this year to apply for executive clemency, also known as a commutation of sentence. That power was granted to the governor in the state constitution of 1777.

Spitzer did grant a pardon last week, to Frederick Lake, a Jamaican immigrant who spent six years in prison for robbery. Lake has lived in Brooklyn with his wife and sons since 1997, and Spitzer's pardon spared Lake from deportation.

By comparison, the three previous governors, each of whom served multiple terms, used the clemency power freely: Pataki, 32 times; Cuomo, 37 times; and Carey, 155 times.

Spitzer does not have a formal policy on the practice, said Jennifer Givner, a spokeswoman. "We carefully review clemency and pardon requests on a case-by-case basis," she said.

Anthony Papa is disappointed by Spitzer's dearth of clemencies and pardons. He was granted clemency on Dec. 23, 1996, by Pataki, who was cast as a law-and-order Republican after winning election with a call to reinstate the death penalty.

Papa, who's now a prisoner advocate, said the conventional wisdom was that Spitzer, a Democrat, would be a kinder, gentler governor on matters of crime and punishment.

"It totally floored me that Spitzer didn't show some compassion and give clemencies," said Papa, who served 12 years of his 15-to-life sentence for a drug conviction.

"Spitzer could be countering his downward spiral in the polls by showing some mercy with clemencies. Instead, he's playing it safe politically," said Papa, author of a memoir, "15 to Life." He's a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance, a national group headquartered in New York that is working to repeal the Rockefeller Drug Laws.

The director of Prison Families of New York, based in Albany was also disappointed.

"The governor knows there are many cases that were overly sentenced and this is his opportunity to make a political statement," said Alison Coleman.

Exercising the power of executive clemency carries a political risk, especially for those with presidential aspirations, as Cuomo and governors of other states discovered.

"The use of the pardoning power of a governor of a state is constantly subject to severe criticism from many sources," Edward G. Griffin, counsel to Gov. Al Smith, wrote in 1928.

When Smith ran for president that year, he was attacked for his record number of clemencies in 1924: 92 pardons and 79 commutations of sentences.

Gangi said Spitzer's approach is particularly vexing to prison advocates who applauded his campaign platform of repealing the Rockefeller Drug Laws and reforming Pataki's harsh stance on parole.

"We applaud the governor for appointing progressive people to key criminal justice positions in his administration," Gangi said. "But that has not yet translated into his taking progressive positions, and I hope this doesn't signal that he's taking a hard-line stance on criminal justice issues."

There are other avenues for inmates; Cheri O'Donoghue tried several ways on behalf of her son, Ashley, 24, who was denied clemency by Spitzer after serving four years of a 7-to-21-year sentence on a cocaine sale conviction while he was a student at Hamilton College.

"It's a shame because I expected a whole lot more out of Governor Spitzer based on his inaugural speech about Day One," said O'Donoghue, of Manhattan, who volunteers as a prisoner advocate.

Her son applied and was accepted for a work-release program. He'll be transferred in February to a Manhattan facility that allows furloughs and other privileges as a reward for good behavior.

"Luckily, we didn't pin all our hopes on Governor Spitzer because he's not the savior that prison families expected after all those years of Pataki," she said. Grondahl can be reached at 454-5623 or by e-mail at pgrondahl@timesunion.com.

 

__________________________

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2007/12/spitzer-scrooge.html

New York Daily News

The Daily Politics

Spitzer = Scrooge? (Updated)

By Elizabeth Benjamin

December 28, 2007

Drug law reform activists are furious at Gov. Eliot Spitzer for declining to grant any clemencies during his first year in office, saying that flies in the face of a promise his made during the 2006 campaign to "continue to support efforts to reform these laws."

"This is a cold-heart, hard-line approach to sentencing issues that we hope does not reflect whatever posture he ultimately takes on the drug laws," said Robert Gangi, executive director of the Correctional Association of New York, an organization chartered by the Legislature to monitor conditions in the state’s prisons and issue reports on prison-related issues.

Gangi compared Spitzer to Ebenezer Scrooge before he’s visited by the ghost of Jacob Marley."

That position that is shared by the George Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance, which issued a press release yesterday that included quotes from Anthony Papa <http://www.buffalonews.com/opinion/anothervoice/story/238256.html> , a drug-offender-turned-activist who was granted clemency by former Gov. George Pataki in 1996.

"I know first-hand how meaningful a holiday clemency can be," Papa said. "For the last ten years, I’ve been a productive member of society instead of being locked in a cage for a first-time, nonviolent offense, costing taxpayers nearly half a million dollars. The governor, with one stroke of his pen, can allow others to have the same opportunity that I had."

Spitzer did grant a single pardon this year <http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2007/12/spitzers-christmas-pardon.html> to Frederick Lake, a Brooklyn man who faced deportation back to his native Jamaica due to his criminal record. The governor stressed that he had acted in this case in the interest of preventing Lake from being forced to return home - not because he believed Lake’s claim of innocence, thereby injecting himself into an immigration debate (which didn’t work so well the last time <http://gothamist.com/2007/11/14/steamrolled_spi.php> ).

Unlike a pardon, which erases a conviction from the records, a clemency merely reduces an offender’s sentence. The Parole Board must sign off on clemencies, but historically it has rarely opposed a governor’s wishes.

According to Spitzer spokeman Errol Cockfield, who confirmed the governor does not intend to grant any clemencies this year, the Spitzer administration received some 333 clemency requests as of Nov. 1, 2007.

NOTE: That number is updated with information from the state Division of Parole, which is the entry point for these applications.

"We review each clemency application carefully and come to a decision on a case by case basis," Cockfield said, noting that applicants must meet basic criteria such as having served a minimum of one year in prison and not already being eligible for parole.

Drug law advocates were particularly concerned about Spitzer’s failure to issue any clemencies because it comes on the heels of a preliminary report from his Commission on Sentencing Reform that included no drug law reform recommendations.

The governor could have "sent a message" by granting clememcy to one or more offenders serving time under the drug laws, Gangi said, but his decision not to, coupled with his virtual silence on the topic in general and the commission’s decision to bypass it, does not bode well for this issue in the future.

UPDATE2: The administration also helpfully provided some stats on clemencies past, which appear after the jump.

1990 1 1991 2 1992 2 1993 2 1994 4 1995 2 1996 7 1997 4 1998 0 1999 5 2000 5 2001 3 2002 4 2003 1 2004 0 2005 1 2006 0

The above are all commutation of sentence

2003 1 posthumous pardon (use of foul language in a public forum, given to comedian Lenny Bruce by former Gov. George Pataki).

_________________________

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/opinion/lweb29pardon.html?ref=opinion

 

The New York Times

A Lone Pardon This Year

 By Anthony Papa   December 29, 2007

 To the Editor:

Re "Spitzer Pardons Ex-Convict to Spare Him Deportation" (news article, Dec. 22):

Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s attempt to show compassion this holiday season fell way off the mark. Mr. Spitzer’s single pardon to an individual set free 10 years ago, coupled with the fact that he did not grant one clemency, was nothing more than a safe political move.

There are many nonviolent Rockefeller drug law offenders who have already served lengthy sentences but are stuck in prison because of a continuing political quagmire. Traditionally, these offenders have been granted clemency at Christmastime.

Former Gov. George Pataki, who was known for his toughness on crime, granted clemencies to 28 of them, including me. To give none of those offenders who applied for clemency a chance to be united with their families is a crying shame.

Anthony Papa

New York, Dec. 24, 2007

The writer is a communications specialist at the Drug Policy Alliance.

_________________________

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/149/story/238256.html

 

 

 

Another Voice / Drug laws

Spitzer could recoup with an act of compassion

By Anthony Papa
Updated: 12/28/07 6:55 AM

Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer’s approval rating is at an all-time low of 36 percent, according to a survey by the Siena College Research Institute. This is a far cry from his 69 percent approval rating when he took office. The survey polled about 1,000 voters in December, of which 47 percent said the governor should become a “kinder, gentler governor.” But 41 percent of Republicans said they doubt whether the transformation can be made.

The question I pose is: “How can Spitzer counter his downward spiral and start winning back the voters of New York State?” One answer is to show the citizens of New York that, despite the negativity generated from the trials and tribulations of his governorship, he is still an individual who shows compassion for others. Compassion, a virtue found in many great leaders, is said to be not sentiment but the act of making justice through works of mercy.

This holiday season, I recommend that Spitzer go on a personal rescue mission and grant executive clemency to the large number of Rockefeller Drug Law prisoners who have fully rehabilitated themselves and already have served large amounts of time behind bars under the draconian provisions of mandatory minimum sentencing.

In granting a record number of clemencies, Spitzer would be following in the wake of recent trends that favor reducing racial disparities precipitated by the War on Drugs. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court returned to judges their discretion over following the rigid structure of federal sentencing guidelines in drug cases, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission created changes in crack cocaine sentencing that would retroactively set free 20,000 prisoners.

Traditionally, at Christmas time New York’s governor grants executive clemency to a number of individuals. Former Republican Gov. George E. Pataki granted 32 in his career, with 28 of them being Rockefeller Drug Law prisoners (point of disclosure: I was one of them). Gov. Mario Cuomo granted 33 and Gov. Hugh Carey gave out 155.

If granted clemency, a prisoner immediately becomes eligible for parole. Although parole is not guaranteed, the New York State Parole Board has released the majority of prisoners whose sentences were commuted.

Today there are almost 14,000 individuals imprisoned under the Rockefeller Drug Laws; 90 percent of them are black and Latino. Despite two minor reforms in 2004 and 2005, a welcomed first step, the majority of Rockefeller prisoners were not touched by the changes. For many who have fallen through the cracks, their only hope to regain their freedom is through the act of executive clemency.

There will be many families praying this holiday season that Spitzer shows his compassion for those who have taken it upon themselves to improve their lives and are ready to re-enter society as productive citizens.

Anthony Papa is the author of “15 to Life”and a communications specialist for theDrug Policy Alliance.

 

 

FLASH!!!!   December 19, 2007    A Call to governor spitzer to grant executive clemency to rockefeller offenders who have fallen in the cracks of a political Quagmire

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-papa/rescue-mission-for-govern_b_77341.html

 

 

Letters to the editor

December 14 2007



A first change in drug sentencing

Re "Justices OK latitude on sentencing," Dec. 11

Finally, the Supreme Court has positively reacted to the cruelty of a bad sentencing law that has been tossed around between legislatures and the courts for 20 years. In that time, an alarming number of people's lives have been destroyed by racially discriminatory crack-cocaine laws that disproportionately sentenced people of color. However, the decision to give judges more power to use sentencing discretion is only a first step in correcting these clearly draconian laws that were constructed because of the politics of the drug war. I hope it sends a clear message to prosecutors that mandatory minimum sentences are a part of an archaic judicial structure that needs to be overhauled in the name of justice.

Anthony Papa

Communications Specialist

Drug Policy Alliance

New York

 

 

12/11/07

http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=446&Itemid=1

 

The U.S. Sentencing Commission has acknowledged the obvious: that penalties for possession of "crack" cocaine, as opposed to the powdered kind, amount to racist law designed to disproportionately incarcerate African Americans. Despite the Sentencing Commission's recommendation that Congress repeal its racist crack cocaine laws, the U.S. Justice Department resists righting the historical wrong, warning that release of crack offenders would open "the flood gates of hell." Rather, Bush's demonic bureaucrats rush to defend the citadels of the American Black Prison Gulag, an abomination unmatched on the planet - slavery's incarnation in the 21st Century.

Change Racist Crack Cocaine Laws

by Anthony Papa

"Only the U.S. Congress can eliminate the racist sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine."

This article previously appeared in Counterpunch.

RSS

Does the number 1 equal 100? In common math it does not, but when you are talking federal drug sentencing it unfortunately does. If you distribute just five grams of crack, it carries a minimum five-year federal prison sentence. If you distribute 500 grams of powder cocaine, it carries the same sentence. This 100:1 sentencing disparity has been condemned for its racially discriminatory impact by a wide array of criminal justice and civil rights groups. Hispanics and whites make up the majority of crack cocaine users, but the majority of those convicted under crack cocaine offenses are African Americans.

After many years of heated debate over the issue of crack vs. powder cocaine sentencing disparities, the U.S. Sentencing Commission decided to ease the penalties for crack on November 1, 2007. A hearing was held on November 13 to determine whether or not to apply retroactively recommended revisions to the federal guidelines that lowered the minimum sentences for crack cocaine-related offenses. If recommended, about 4,000 prisoners will be released this year by shaving an average of two years off their sentences, with almost 16,000 to follow. In theory, it would be the largest single act to reduce the sentences of federal prisoners.

"The Justice Department quickly put out a statement saying that the proposed changes to the law would put thousands of violent criminals back on the streets."

Critics were quick to exploit the age-old defensive argument that the flood gates of hell would be opened if such an action were to become law. The Justice Department quickly put out a statement saying that the proposed changes to the law would put thousands of violent criminals back on the streets. The National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys warned that by freeing thousands of prisoners it would overburden prosecutors.  Advocates rebutted saying that if the law is passed it will be a small step towards mitigating the sentence disparity between crack and powder cocaine, which disproportionately affects people of color. Even federal judges like Chief Justice Robert Pratt of Iowa, has said that talk of a sudden large amount of freed prisoners was inflated, and that workloads should not prevent creating fair sentencing in crack cocaine cases that serves the interests of justice.

Some say that Congress probably did not set out to pass racially discriminatory crack cocaine laws some twenty years ago. Whether or not these laws were created with the intention of targeting African Americans, let's make no mistake about it: it has. Jasmine Tyler, deputy director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, said, "We are encouraged by the U.S. Sentencing Commission's commitment to do what is in their power to address harsh crack cocaine sentences, and we are hopeful that the Commission will apply this relief retroactively. However, only the U.S. Congress can eliminate the racist sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine sentences and we implore them to do so now."

"Pharmacologically they are the same drug."

The unfair sentencing that is in effect was enacted based on the many myths that surround crack use. These included media stories that told of a "crack baby" epidemic in the 1980s, stories now found to be greatly exaggerated or flat-out lies. Research now shows that factors such as smoking and drinking, malnutrition, inadequate sleep, and poverty are responsible for the many pre-natal ailments associated with crack use. Criminal penalties for possession and sales of cocaine are severe. But the penalties for crack cocaine are much more severe, despite the fact that pharmacologically they are the same drug. If these suggested changes, take affect and are applied retroactively, it will do a lot to balance the scales of justice in reforming a bad law that has dished out unfair sentences to people convicted of crack cocaine offenses.

Anthony Papa is the author of "15 to Life" and a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance. He can be contacted at tpapa@drugpolicy.org This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

____________

 

http://www.chicagosportsreview.com/inthemeantime/contentview.asp?c=204651

 

http://www.blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/Commentary_1/Barry_Bonds_And_The_Drug_War.shtml

 

Barry Bonds And The Drug War
A Different Look At The BALCO Scandal

 tpapa@drugpolicy.org
POSTED: Nov 27, 2007

 

image
NEW YORK -- What does the war on drugs have to do with baseball? Just ask Barry Bonds who was just indicted by federal prosecutors on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice.   

Bonds is now facing up to 30 years in prison if convicted. Anti-doping advocates, including America’s deputy drug czar, are calling for jail time for baseball players who use steroids saying that it may be the only effective deterrent for curbing illegal use.

Let’s face it, while Bonds’s indictment for lying to a grand jury may have legal basis, the real underlying reason for this federal indictment four years after the BALCO investigation is their failure to get Bonds to admit he had used steroids or any other performance-enhancing drugs. 

In that case a business named Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative (BALCO) was alleged to be distributing illegal performance -- enhancing drugs was investigated by several governmental agencies.  This resulted in a huge scandal which involved many major league baseball players and led to Major League Baseball initiating penalties for players caught using steroids in 2004.

Well now the government is ready to take down the home-run king along with the entire sport of baseball by pushing their personal agenda of a zero tolerance for drug use.

Travis Tygart, head of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency thinks that Major League Baseball’s rules concerning the use of performance-enhancing drugs such as steroids don’t pack enough of a wallop in terms of functioning as a real deterrent.  He is rooting for Bonds to be imprisoned so it sends a clear message.

Imprisonment of record-breaking hitters like Bonds will not solve baseball’s problem. I know this is true because of the failed war on drugs. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. 

It has 5% of the world’s population, but 25% of the world’s prisoners, with more than 2.3 million citizens sitting behind bars, a rate of one in every 136 U.S. residents. 

About 55% of all federal and over 20% of all state prisoners are convicted of drug-law violations with many of them serving mandatory-minimum sentences for simple possession offences.  And despite all of the incarceration drug use and drug availability are as prevalent as ever.  Are we now going to add major league players to drug war statistics?

For the sake of argument, what if Bonds did use steroids?  Does he belong in jail? He is not the first athlete to use them and he will not be the last. The pursuit for athletic superiority through the use of chemicals has been around a long time.  Before steroids were officially banned in the early 1970’s, almost 70% of all Olympic athletes had used them.  

Is it ethical and morally right to sentence someone to a lengthy prison term for putting substances in their own bodies? The premise for prosecuting the other war with no exit strategy – the drug war -- has slowly but surely infiltrated the public’s eye through different vehicles.  

Now the feds attempt to bring their message through the sport of baseball.  Bonds joins the ranks of the demonized including medical marijuana users, pain sufferers and their doctors who prescribe opioid analgesics, and students who are forced to urinate in cups. All of this in the name of a drug-free America without concern for individuals’ rights.

At one time baseball was our obsession.  It was a sport that walked hand and hand with the American dream full of heroes of whom we could all be proud. 

Now the federal government, with its crusade against any and all drug use, has begun a new mission to alter our way of thinking no matter what the cost or how many lives are ruined. I say no to the government for trying to destroy our national past time and no to imprisoning a baseball king.
 


Anthony Papa is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance and the author of “15 to Life”.

 

 

 

Flash!  11/20/2207   Putting Pressure on the Sentencing Commission/  The op-ed below was published in the three cities where the sentencing commission held public hearings sending them a message to address Rockefeller Drug Law reform

Buffalo NY/ Albany NY/ NYC!

 

chambers’ arrest highlights need for further reforms
Buffalo News,  United States - Nov 14, 2007
by anthony papa robert chambers spent 15 years in prison for the notorious murder of jennifer levin, whom he claimed he accidentally strangled during rough ...

no time to waste in sentencing issue
Albany Times Union, NY - Nov 10, 2007
... details of his 1986 slaying case will have no sympathy for chambers. what's most outrageous about this case, though, is that chambers faces more time ...
 

http://www.nysun.com/article/65937

'Isn't It Ironic, Don't You Think?'

BY ANTHONY PAPA

November 6, 2007

There has been an onslaught of press attention following the arrest of "Preppy Killer" Robert Chambers due to, this time, selling cocaine. One fact that has been omitted from the coverage is that Chambers now faces more time for selling drugs under the Rockefeller Drug Laws than he did for the murder he committed in 1986.

Chambers served 15 years in prison for the notorious murder of Jennifer Levin. He claimed that he accidentally strangled Levin during rough sex. Despite his horrific crime, Chambers was allowed to plead guilty to first-degree manslaughter instead of second-degree murder and was sentenced to serve between five and 15 years in prison. He wound up serving 15 years because of bad behavior, which included smuggling and selling drugs while in prison.

Now, 21 years later, Chambers has been arrested again, this time for selling cocaine to undercover officers. He faces top felony counts that can mean life in prison. As the case unfolds, it is evident that Chambers, along with his girlfriend, Shawn Kovell, who also was arrested, are both heavily addicted to drugs. They were described as "crackheads" by detectives who searched their disheveled Upper East Side apartment.

Despite significant evidence against him, Chambers has pleaded not guilty to multiple charges of selling cocaine that can land him sentences of between 15 and 30 years for each of the highest counts under the Rockefeller Drug Laws. So, if he is found guilty of the multiple charges, he could be spending the rest of his life in prison.

Those who remember the details of his 1986 case will have no sympathy for Chambers who has a history of drug addiction. A year after his release in 2003, he was arrested again while driving with a suspended license. Officers found drug residue in his car. He pled guilty to the charges and served 100 days on a misdemeanor charge. The most outrageous fact of all of Chambers's cases is that he faces more time for a drug offense under the Rockefeller Drug Laws than he did for taking Levin's life.

Despite two minor reforms made by the legislature in 2004 and 2005 that slightly reduced the length of most drug sentences, there are 14,000 individuals in prison sentenced under the Rockefeller drug laws. Many of them are nonviolent offenders and are serving longer sentences than people who commit rape or murder. There is something very wrong with this equation.

For example, Ashley O'Donoghue, a first time non-violent offender sold a small amount of drugs to two students at Hamilton College in upstate New York in 2003. The students got arrested, but worked out a deal with prosecutors that gave them probation. O'Donoghue, however, is serving a seven to 21-year sentence.

The reforms by the legislature, though, did not provide the needed relief for the vast majority of Rockefeller offenders. For example it reduced the highest sentences from 15 years to life to between eight and 20 years. The reforms also made some long-term drug offenders eligible for retroactive relief.

Since 1973 when the Rockefeller Laws were enacted, we have witnessed the creation of a drug-law gulag fed by a poorly conceived law that incarcerated many drug offenders from the inner city neighborhoods of New York. This helped to create smart upstate politicians who saw the Rockefeller Drug Laws as a tool to make the business of imprisonment a major industry in their districts creating a disincentive in the legislature to reform these laws.

The recent reform did not provide funding to increase the availability of community based drug treatment. It did not increase the power of judges to place addicts into treatment programs. It also did not provide relief for the 4,000 B-drug felons: Out of the 1,000 individuals that became eligible for retroactive relief, only about 350 individuals have been freed to date because of procedural road blocks created by district attorneys.

Governor Spitzer recently put together a panel to study the disparity of sentencing guidelines in New York State. One of the issues was the Rockefeller Drug Laws. But in its recently released preliminary report, the commission failed even to address the issue of Rockefeller Drug Law reform. State commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform, Denise O'Donnell, said the issue would be addressed next time. The final report is due in March of 2008.

But the evidence is already in, and the issue does not need any more studies. It needs political will and action. The Spitzer panel must consider the families of those incarcerated, and the precious tax dollars being wasted on the court's archaic sentencing structure. Hundreds of nonviolent Rockefeller offenders in prison are serving longer sentences than those of convicted murderers.

Something is fundamentally wrong with a system that advocates serving more time for a nonviolent drug offense then for a hideous crime committed by a sociopath like Robert Chambers. On November 13, individuals affected by the Rockefeller Drug Laws will come together to speak at a public hearing conducted by the sentencing commission at the New York City Bar Association. Their message to the commission will be this: the problem needs to be fixed now not "next time." 

Mr. Papa, the author of "15 to Life," is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance.

_________________

 

WNYC Home

 

Commission Urges Lawmakers to Appeal Sentencing Laws

by Patricia Willens  http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/88822

Commission Urges Lawmakers to Appeal Sentencing Laws

by Patricia Willens

NEW YORK, NY November 13, 2007 —Former inmates and prison reformers were on hand today as the New York Sentencing Reform Commission held a hearing on possibly reforming the so-called Rockefeller drug laws.

REPORTER: The state has stiff sentencing rules that don't allow judges flexibility and put many people behind bars, who might be better served in treatment programs.

Anthony Papa speaks from experience. He says he was behind bars for 12 years for carrying 4 ounces of cocaine

PAPA: These laws don't work, they incarcerate too many blacks and latinos. It's costly, ineffective, treatment has been shown to be better and we need to change these laws.

REPORTER: There are two more hearings on sentencing reform in the state. They're in Albany and Buffalo over the next week. The Commission is tasked with making recommendations to the governor in the spring. There are nearly 14,000 people jailed for drug offenses in New York State prisons. They represent about 38 percent of the prison population.

 

 

 

____________________________

 

Albany Times Union

 Time is now for drug sentencing reform 

 Wednesday, October 24, 2007

 

In response to your Oct. 15 editorial, "This time, real reform":

The state commission's preliminary report failed to address the issue of Rockefeller Drug Law reform. Denise O'Donnell, state commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform, said the issue would be addressed next time.

 I am an activist who has been involved in fighting for reform since 1985, when I was convicted of a nonviolent drug offense and sentenced to 15 years to life. I have heard the same story from several governors and the Legislature for many years.

 The evidence is in. The issue does not need any more studies. It needs political will and action. The panel must consider the families of those incarcerated, those rotting away in prison and the valuable tax dollars being wasted on its archaic sentencing structure. We are tired of hearing "next time."

 ANTHONY PAPA

New York

 The writer is author of "15 to Life."

_______________

 

Flash!   October 17, 2007    Sentencing Commission fails to address the Rockefeller Drug Laws!

The state commission’s preliminary report failed to address the issue of Rockefeller drug reform. Denise O'Donnell, state commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform said that the issue would be addressed next time.   I am an activist who has been involved in fighting for reform since 1985 when I was convicted of a non-violent drug offense and sentenced to 15 years to life.  I have heard the same story from several governors and the legislature for many years.  The evidence is in, the issue does not need any more studies, it needs political will and action.   The panel must consider the families of those incarcerated, those rotting away in prison and the valuable tax dollars being wasted on its archaic sentencing structure.   We are tried of hearing   “next time”.

 

_________

Poughkeepsie Journal (New York)

October 17, 2007 Wednesday

Panel: Streamline sentencing laws

BYLINE: Cara Matthews

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 2A

LENGTH: 591 words

   ALBANY - New York needs to simplify its "virtually unintelligible" sentencing system and should permit community treatment rather than prison terms for certain non-violent felony drug offenders, a state sentencing-reform panel recommended Tuesday.

   Sentencing laws have not received a thorough review and revision in more than 40 years and have developed into an "overly complex, Byzantine system that is fraught with opportunities for injustice," said Denise O'Donnell, state commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform.

   O'Donnell said in the report the system has become "virtually unintelligible"

in many cases to judges, attorneys, defendants and victims.

   "We could perform a significant service to the criminal-justice system if we could arrive at a consensus about how we could simplify the sentencing structure," she said Tuesday.

   Spitzer formed the 11-member panel this year to study whether punishments fit the crimes and protect public safety in New York. Besides prison sentences, the panel has been reviewing community supervision, alternatives to incarceration and other parts of the criminal-justice system.

   The report said the current system is the result of decades of "piecemeal amendments arising more often from political than criminal justice policy considerations." The complicated sentencing laws, the mix of determinate, or fixed, and indeterminate, or variable, sentences, and "back-door early release mechanisms" all contribute to the problem, it said.

   The commission report released Tuesday is preliminary. The panel will hold public hearings before issuing a final report March 1. Any significant change would need legislative approval.

   Recommendations include:

   * End indeterminate sentencing for more than 200 non-violent felonies. With fixed sentences, a judge imposes a prison term with a minimum and maximum and the parole board decides when the offender is released.

   * Allow courts to send certain non-violent drug-addicted felony offenders to community-based treatment instead of state prison if the judge, prosecutor and defendant agree.

   * Consider a broader use of "graduated sanctions" - curfew, home confinement and electronic monitoring, for example - rather than prison for certain parolees who violate one or more conditions of release but don't commit a new crime.

   * Pass new laws and step up enforcement of existing statutes to further protect crime victims.

   * Help reduce recidivism and increase public safety by expanding educational and vocational training and improving employment and housing opportunities for offenders.

   * Establish a permanent sentencing commission to advise the legislative and executive branches.

   O'Donnell, Spitzer's assistant secretary for criminal justice, said the commission is mindful of the financial impact of its proposals. "I believe we are all operating on the understanding that if we could reduce recidivism, continue to reduce the prison population," then the state could invest money into other programs to help offenders, she said.

   Gabriel Sayegh, program director of the Drug Policy Alliance, said his group is disappointed the report does not include any "substantive recommendations" on the Rockefeller-era drug laws.

   The laws, which many people have called harsh and unreasonable, were passed in 1973 under then-Gov. Nelson Rockefeller. The Legislature made some changes to them in 2004 and 2005, but the Drug Policy Alliance and other groups have said lawmakers did not go far enough.

   Reach Cara Matthews at clmatthe@gannett.com

____________________

 

http://www.counterpunch.org/papa09252007.html

 

http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/63662/

 

Will Drug Lord Do Less Time Than the Average American Nonviolent Drug Offender?

By Anthony Papa, AlterNet. Posted September 27, 2007.

Why Colombia's top drug lord may get off easier than small-time offenders in the U.S.


The U.S. government recently praised the arrest of Colombia's top drug lord Diego Montoya when he was captured earlier this month. Law enforcement and military officials say it was a powerful blow to Colombia's most powerful drug cartel, comparing it to the capture of Al Capone during Prohibition.

Montoya, who had been on the FBI's top ten most wanted list, is said to be responsible for providing as much as 70 percent of all the cocaine in the United States. In 1999, a $5 million bounty for his capture and extradition was offered after he was indicted in a federal court in Miami.

There is much talk about how this capture will affect the drug trade and the flow of drugs into the United States. But the question on my mind is how much time will he serve when he is brought to the United States to stand trial for the death and destruction he has caused? I would be willing to bet that he will get less time than many Americans who are now serving extraordinarily long sentences, many for low-level, nonviolent drug law violations under the notorious mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Some would ask how would I come to this conclusion.

If you look at the recently completed federal sentence of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, who served a 17-year federal sentence for drug trafficking, it might give you a hint what is in store for Montoya. In Noriega's case the U.S. attorney negotiated deals with 26 high-level drug dealers, including drug lord Carlos Lehder. They in turn received a package of perks that included leniency and cash payments, and were allowed to keep their drug earnings in return for testimony against the infamous general who was once a strong United States ally before he fell from grace in 1989, when the U.S. invaded Panama.

There are many Americans in prison that are serving sentences of more than 17 years in prison for simple drug crimes. These are marginalized offenders that don't have the bargaining chips to establish deals. For example, Elaine Bartlett, a mother of four, served a 20-to-life sentence under the Rockefeller Drug Laws for seven ounces of cocaine. Her husband, Nathan Brooks, was sentenced to 25 years to life. The list goes on and on. There are an estimated 500,000 Americans locked up because of the drug war. Many of them are serving lengthy sentences because of a 30-year government campaign to demonize illicit drug use and implement mandatory minimum sentencing.

In 1986, mandatory minimum sentencing laws were enacted by Congress, which comp