supreme court ruling on cocaine/ crack law law?

Question

has anyone heard anything about this on cnn. I have been hearing that a lot of people who are in prison, based on some kind of law will get time cuts, is this true, if so can someone direct e to the link, of provide add, info thanks

what will that mean, will people get a lesser sentence, someone that i know has already done 7 years of an 18 year sentence but it was on conspiracy, the charge was cocaine base, becasue of this im wondering what will happen

Answer 1

The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the question -- they have only agreed to hear arguments.

And the arguments basically relate to two things -- first, should the difference in racial make-up of those who commit different crimes be taken into account when setting the sentences for those crimes -- that's an issue because the vast majority of crack users are black, and the vast majority of powder cocaine users are white -- and the two drugs, despite being very similar, have very different sentences by amount in possession.

The second is purely procedural -- whether and to what extend the federal sentencing guidelines need to be followed, after the Supreme Court ruled a few years ago that they were only advisory, not mandatory limits.

Answer 2

There is some debate over this... because the constitution says we can have no ex post facto laws (after the fact laws). Meaning that if you were convicted of a crime under a certain law that was at the time considered good law, then you are bound by the sentence associated with that crime under that law. However... there's a question as to whether the unconstitutionality of a regulation is void ab initio (invalid from the beginning) or voidable. I'm not an attorney, and this is a relatively complicated issue -- so I'll only postulate... and suggest you see an attorney for a definitive answer... but as a paralegal, I believe that laws are voidable -- which means that they stand firm and true until the time that they are determined to be unconstitutional, and that unless specifically enumerated in the court decision which rules the regulation unconstitutional, the sentences of those sentenced under the law stand strong, too.

Answer 3

The U.S. Sentencing Commission, the administrative body that sets the U.S. Sentencing "Guidelines" for federal sentences, has revised the recommendation (that was forced by Congress) regarding the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity.
More here:
http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2007/05/conclusive_proo.html

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a powder/crack disparity case as well, here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061101620.html

But the change in the Guidelines (especially if made retroactive) may make the case moot.

Answer 4

They did not rule on any cocaine or crack law. They ruled on weather or not a judge could deviate from federal sentencing guidelines. The court found that the federal guidelines were advisory and the judge could. In this case (which did involve crack) the judge actually gave the defendant less time than federal guidelines.

See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202018.html for more details.

Answer 5

poopsie said.... have never heard about that. I would e-mail fox news, they seem to be the only true one's on t,v,

there is no truth on television news, just a choice of your flavor of lies: liberal or conservative.

as far as the cocaine business: what did your friend do, forget to payoff the feds that week? or was it the local cops that were after their cut? maybe the supplier decided that he/she was expendable. I might be too jaded to comment on this question, as I've seen to many bright souls reduced to flickering candles as a result of cocaine and/or crack. I say to hell with coke dealers...and make no mistake it's nothing to do with actually selling drugs to people. rather it's the fact that the dealer supports the scumbags at the top that profit from it. sorry but your friend has been used as a foot soldier for powerful and wealthy individuals who wage war on their own people.

Answer 6

It's a case involving Derrick Kimbrough, no ruling issued yet.

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_06_6330/
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/qp/06-06330qp.pdf

This last link is the oral argument which took place before the Court. This is the most current info, until they issue a decision.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/06-6330.pdf

Answer 7

I have never heard about that. I would e-mail fox news, they seem to be the only true one's on t,v,

Answer 8

yes it true i was just looking at it my self and i just posted a question about it check this out........http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/new_ussc_crack_guidelines_and_report/index.html

Answer 9

Gosh, I hope so. Wanna buy some crack?

Answer 10

are you on crack right now now?