Tag Archives: Lee

Is Senate Fed Up With BOP? – Update for July 13, 2023

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, SENATORS MAY BE TELLING BOP

Phineas T. Barnum reputedly said, “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.” But P.T. Barnum never served as Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

badpublicity230714It’s been a rough ride. First, the Dept. of Justice Inspector General has issued a scathing report of BOP mismanagement and maladministration that led to the suicide of high-value celebrity prisoner Jeffrey Epstein and the murder of Whitey Bulger. There has been a steady stream of death-of-a-thousand-cuts reports of BOP employees being convicted of everything from inmate sexual abuse to cellphone smuggling to COVID fraud. The Washington Post fumed last week that “regardless of the offense, any unnatural death in custody is a failure of the prison system.”

This week has seen well-loathed U.S. Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar – serving an endless string of life sentences for an endless string of revolting assaults of women gymnasts – stabbed multiple times at USP Coleman by attackers unknown. BOP employees promptly blamed the attack on a short-staffed facility.

It wasn’t long before the Associated Press reported that Nassar was attacked inside his cell, “a blind spot for prison surveillance cameras that only record common areas and corridors.” The AP said, “In federal prison parlance, because of the lack of video, it is known as an ‘unwitnessed event.’”

It isn’t clear that even full implementation of the Prison Camera Reform Act (Pub.L. 117-321), hardly prevented Capitol Hill from finally having had enough of the BOP follies.

Enough is more than enough. After several half-hearted attempts to address BOP management weaknesses, a bipartisan group of senators yesterday announced the introduction of the Federal Prison Accountability Act of 2023 (no bill number assigned yet), intended to increase oversight at federal prisons.

FPAA would require the president to seek Senate advice and consent when appointing the BOP director, who would be appointed to a single, 10-year term. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said requiring Senate confirmation of the BOP director would “bring badly needed transparency and accountability to the federal prison system.”

“The Director of the Bureau of Prisons leads thousands of employees and expends a massive budget,” Grassley said in a press release. “It’s a big job with even bigger consequences should mismanagement or abuse weasel its way into the system.”

sexualassault211014It took awhile to get here. Following an 8-month investigation last year that revealed rampant sexual abuse of female prisoners and a failure to prevent recurring sexual abuse, Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) introduced the Federal Prison Oversight Act (S.4988) late last year. The bill – which would have required the DOJ Inspector General to conduct inspections of the BOP’s 122 correctional facilities, provide recommendations to problems and assign each facility a risk score – was window-dressing, a political statement with no chance of passage in the waning days of the 117th Congress.

Three months ago, however, Ossoff introduced a revised version of FPOA (S.1401), with Rep. Lucy McBath (D-GA) filing a companion bill in the House (H.R.3109). The new FPOA would have, among other actions, created a hotline for prisoners to report misconduct.

mismanagement210419Now, three months later, the latest effort to reform federal prisons would subject the BOP director to the same congressional scrutiny as other law enforcement agency chiefs such as the director of the FBI, which Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said is needed. “The Director of the Bureau of Prisons oversees more than 34,000 employees and a multi-billion dollar budget, and should be subject to Senate review and confirmation as well,” McConnell said.

Grassley introduced FPAA along with McConnell and Sens Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT), John Cornyn (R-TX), Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mike Braun (R-IN) and Ossoff. With that kind of legislative horsepower behind it – not to mention black eyes like Jeffrey Epstein, Whitey Bulger and Larry Nasser – it’s safe to predict that Director Colette Peters may be the last BOP Director to not be approved by the Senate.

The Hill, Bipartisan senators introduce bill to increase federal prison oversight (July 13, 2023)

Sen. Charles Grassley, Senators Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Increase Accountability at Federal Prisons (July 13, 2023)

Associated Press, Larry Nassar was stabbed in his cell and the attack was not seen by prison cameras, AP source says (July 11, 2023)

Associated Press, Former federal prison guard sent to prison for violating civil rights of injured inmate (July 11, 2023)

Washington Post, Jeffrey Epstein’s suicide reveals grave failures of U.S. prisons (July 10, 2023)

– Thomas L. Root

EQUAL Act May Be In Trouble – Update for May 2, 2022

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

SUDDENLY, CRIMINAL JUSTICE LEGISLATION IS IN TROUBLE

Just last Friday, I mused that the EQUAL Act (S.79) – the much-heralded legislation that would finally make penalties for cocaine distribution identical regardless of the form the cocaine took (cocaine base or cocaine powder) – might have a little competition.

russiantank220502Now, that seems to be like predicting the Russians might run into a little delay on their way to Kyiv.

On Friday, it looked like a few Republican senators might want to leverage their SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act to win a few amendment concessions before EQUAL passes. Now, the problem seems much more extreme than that.

At the end of last week, The New York Times reported, “with control of Congress at stake and Republicans weaponizing a law-and-order message against Democrats in their midterm election campaigns, the fate of [the EQUAL Act] is in doubt. Democrats worry that bringing it up would allow Republicans to demand a series of votes that could make them look soft on crime and lax on immigration — risks they are reluctant to take months before they face voters… Even the measure’s Republican backers concede that bringing it to the floor could lead to an array of difficult votes.”

You may recall that on Thursday, Senators Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi), Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) announced SMART, a bill that would reduce the current 18:1 crack-to-powder ratio to 2.5:1 instead of EQUAL’s 1:1.

(If Lindsay Graham’s name seems familiar, maybe that’s because he is also a co-sponsor of the EQUAL Act).

But diddling with the ratio is not all that SMART does.  For people already convicted under 18:1, there would be no retroactivity unless the Attorney General “certified” to the court that the sentence should be reduced. Mind you this is the same Dept. of Justice that rejects thousands of clemency petitions before they ever reach the White House and fights hammer and tong against any inmate seeking First Step Act Section 404 reductions.

scrooge220502Imagine nominating Scrooge to plan Santa Claus. Same thing.

Grassley argued last week that the EQUAL Act does not account for the differences in recidivism rates between the two types of cocaine offenses. He said crack offenders reoffend at a 60.8% rate while powder cocaine offenders are at only 43.8%, and crack defendants are the most likely drug offenders to carry weapons.

The obvious rejoinder is that if the crack offenders are carrying weapons, there are Guidelines enhancements (such as § 2D1.1(b(1)) and even separate statutory offenses that do a much better job of targeting the people with the guns than punishing one class of drug offenders for the probability that the person has a weapon. As for recidivism, the Guidelines already increase sentencing ranges based on the defendant’s criminal history. Arguing that a crack offender must be punished more severely than a cocaine powder offender because he or she is statistically more likely to commit a crime in the future has a certain “Minority Report” aura to it.

FAMM President Kevin Ring blasted SMART on Twitter for

INCREASING the # of people who will be subject to man mins for powder while reducing the # subject to man mins for crack. Remember, no member had suggested powder sentences were too low until the EQUAL Act gained steam.” Plus, SMART “requires the Attorney General to certify every request for retroactive application of the new penalties. This is unprecedented and absurd. No retroactive changes in recent history – by the Commission or Congress – ever required AG certification.

But beyond the weird provisions of SMART is the fear that it may spell the death of EQUAL. Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman said in his Sentencing Law and Policy blog, worried that “the fact that the EQUAL Act has not become law already makes me concerned about the fate and future or long-overdue efforts to end the crack/cocaine sentencing disparity.”

“The time for negotiation has passed, and it passed a long time ago,” said Jason Pye from the Due Process Institute. “The EQUAL Act is an exercise in bipartisanship, which is more than I can say for Senator Grassley’s bill.”

Meanwhile, expectations are wavering over the marijuana legalization bill that Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) promised would be introduced in April. Now lawmakers have pushed the timeline back to later in the summer as continued debate threatens the bill’s success.

senatemarijuana220412Schumer said he wanted to give senators time to debate certain provisions. The Senate majority leader said he is reaching across party lines to gain support for the bill, but experts predict he won’t have enough Republican votes for passage. The bill faces opposition from some Democrats, including Sen Joe Manchin (D-WV), who last month told The Hill that is he unsure about legalizing adult-use marijuana.

Last month, the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act passed the House with a near-party line vote that included only three Republicans. MORE is not expected to pass the Senate.

As the November midterms approach, it is likely that criminal justice will become even more of a political game, with federal prisoners as the football.

The New York Times, Drug Sentencing Bill Is in Limbo as Midterm Politics Paralyze Congress (April 29, 2022)

S.__ (no number yet), SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act

Sen Charles Grassley, Senators Introduce Bill To Reduce Crack-Powder Sentencing Disparity, Protect Communities From Criminals Most Likely To Reoffend (April 28, 2022)

Politico, Huddle: Freedom Caucus at a crossroads (April 29, 2022)

Twitter, Kevin Ring, Current Crack-Powder Disparity Is Unjustifiable (April 28, 2022)

Sentencing Law and Policy, GOP Senators introduce competing crack/powder sentencing reform bill tougher than EQUAL Act (April 29, 2022)

The Paper, Cannabis News (April 28, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

EQUAL Act Runs Into Some Competition in Senate – Update for April 29, 2022

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

BACK TO WORK FOR CONGRESS

Congress is back in session after Easter/Passover/Ramadan break, and the drumbeat continues for the EQUAL Act, even as insurrection against the favored bill brews.

crackpowder160606As noted earlier this week, the DOJ threw a plug in for EQUAL as part of its PATTERN report to Congress. It wasn’t alone. Last week, The Hill editorialized that “April is Second Chance Month and an opportunity to think deeply about the real purpose of incarceration — and of penal systems more broadly. Is the purpose to dehumanize those who transgress? Or is it to protect communities and preserve or restore justice within them?… The EQUAL Act… addresses the sentencing disparity in our federal justice system involving penalties for crack and powder cocaine offenses, which has resulted in unintentional racial disparities and significantly higher federal prison populations. The law was intended to reduce the harm of crack cocaine possession, distribution and consumption. The validity of its original intention may be debated, but it has been proven to have unacceptable consequences.”

Writing in the Washington Examiner, former congressman Doug Collins said, “it’s no surprise that law enforcement is spearheading” the EQUAL Act… Roughly 90% of those serving time for crack offenses at the federal level are black, which means they serve vastly longer prison sentences than those convicted of powder cocaine offenses, even though the substances are chemically similar and equally dangerous. According to the country’s most respected law enforcement leaders, eliminating this disparity would help police officers build trust with communities of color, especially in urban areas where law enforcement finds it difficult to cultivate sources to investigate murders, shootings, and other violent crimes.”

Screwup190212However, proving that nothing in this world is such a slam-dunk that Congress cannot screw it up, the Start Making Adjustments and Require Transparency in Cocaine Sentencing Act (shorthand, “SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act” – an obvious competitor to the EQUAL Act – was introduced in the Senate yesterday. SMART, sponsored by Senators Roger Wicker (Mississippi), Charles Grassley (Iowa), Mike Lee (Utah) and Lindsey Graham (South Carolina), all Republicans – reduces the current 18:1 crack-to-powder ratio to 2.5:1 instead of EQUAL’s 1:1.

The nasty part of SMART is that for people already convicted under 18:1, there would be no retroactivity unless the Attorney General “certified” to the court that the sentence should be reduced. Given the Dept. of Justice’s traditional antipathy to the many prisoners seeking First Step Act Section 404 reductions, this is yet another example of turning the keys to the henhouse over to the fox.

Sen. Grassley explained the thinking behind SMART:

Separate legislation has been introduced in the Senate to completely flatten the differences between sentences for crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses. This approach does not account for the differences in recidivism rates associated with the two types of cocaine offenses. According to a January 2022 analysis from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC), crack cocaine offenders recidivate at the highest rate of any drug type at 60.8 percent, while powder cocaine offenders recidivate at the lowest rate of any drug type at 43.8 percent. Raising additional public safety concerns, USSC data reveals that crack cocaine offenders were the most likely among all drug offenders to carry deadly weapons during offenses. These statistics show the need for a close look at all available government data before we consider an approach to flatten sentencing for crack and powder cocaine offenses.

The MORE Act, which would decriminalize marijuana, has passed the House of Representatives. Whether it will pass in the US Senate, where all 50 Democrats and at least 10 Republicans would need to support it, is unclear. Maritza Perez, Director of National Affairs at Drug Policy Alliance, told The Grio last week it will be a “hard sell.” As reported, the Senate will be considering its own bill that Perez said focuses on less on decriminalization and more on a regulatory and tax framework for the sale and use of cannabis.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said a week ago Wednesday that President Biden “remains committed” to honoring his campaign pledge to release “everyone” in federal prison for marijuana, claiming that he believes “no one should be in jail because of drug use.”

marijuanagrow220429Psaki did not provide a timeline. “I don’t have an update here. We are continuing to work with Congress. But what I can say on marijuana is we’ve made some progress on our promises. For instance, the DEA just issued its first licenses to companies to cultivate marijuana for research purposes after years of delay during the prior administration… Additionally, the president’s continuing to review his clemency powers, which is something he also talked about on the campaign trail and he certainly remains committed to taking action on.”

Of course, shortly after this, the President did grant some clemencies, although relatively few to marijuana offenders. More clemencies have been promised, albeit vaguely.

The Hill, Justice for some is no justice at all — we must change our criminal justice system (April 22, 2022)

The Grio, Advocates say legalizing cannabis would restore justice for Blacks, but can Washington get it done? (April 20, 2022)

Washington Examiner, Take the next step on the First Step Act (April 20, 2022)

NY Post, Biden ‘committed’ to freeing inmates with marijuana convictions, Psaki says (April 20, 2022)

S.__ (no number yet), SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act

Sen. Charles Grassley, Senators Introduce Bill To Reduce Crack-Powder Sentencing Disparity, Protect Communities From Criminals Most Likely To Reoffend (April 28, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Drug and 924(c) Sentence Reduction, Retroactivity Bills Introduced – Update for March 29, 2021

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

1000post210328

TWO BILLS CUTTING MANDATORY MINIMUMS, PROPOSING RETROACTIVITY, INTRODUCED IN SENATE

The important but piecemeal work of criminal justice reform continued last week with two significant bills being introduced in the Senate.

smart210328Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois), Mike Lee (R-Utah), and 11 cosponsors introduced S.1013, the Smarter Sentencing Act of 2021, seeking once again to reform some drug mandatory minimums. At the same time, Durbin and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced S.1014, the First Step Implementation Act of 2021.

The Smarter Sentencing Act, an updated version of the Smarter Sentencing Act of 2019 (which went nowhere), continues the mandatory minimum adjustments to 21 USC § 841(b), the sentencing section of the drug trafficking statute begun by the First Step Act. First Step adjusted mandatory life in § 841(b)(1)(A) to 25 years, and mandatory 20 years in the same subsection to 15 years. The Smarter Sentencing Act proposes similar adjustments:

(b)(1)(A): The 15-year mandatory minimum for a prior drug offense would drop to 10 years, and the 10-year mandatory minimum floor would drop to 5 years.

(b)(1)(B): The 10-year mandatory minimum for a prior drug offense would drop to 5 years, and the 5-year mandatory minimum floor would drop to 2 years.

Smarter Sentencing would also create a new category of `courier’ for a defendant whose role was limited to transporting or storing drugs or money. The mandatory minimum for a courier under 21 USC § 960, the importation statute, would essentially be cut in half. It would not affect mandatory minimums in 21 USC § 841(b).

Importantly, the bill makes its changes retroactive, enabling people who now have mandatory minimum sentences changed by the bill to ask their judges for a sentence reduction.

mandatory170612Lee and Durbin first introduced the Smarter Sentencing Act in 2013. Several of its provisions made it into the First Step Act, which was enacted into law in 2018, but the changes in mandatory minimums for most drug offenses would not.

“Mandatory minimum penalties have played a large role in the explosion of the U.S. prison population, often leading to sentences that are unfair, fiscally irresponsible, and a threat to public safety,” Sen. Durbin said in a press release. “The First Step Act was a critical move in the right direction, but there is much more work to be done to reform our criminal justice system. I will keep fighting to get this commonsense, bipartisan legislation through the Senate with my colleague, Senator Lee.”

Meanwhile, S.1014 – the First Step Implementation Act – is equally significant. It would extend retroactivity to anyone sentenced for drug or stacked § 924(c) offenses sentenced prior to the 2018 First Step Act and let judges waive criminal history limitations that keep defendants from getting the 18 USC § 3553 safety value.

Additionally, the bill corrects a weird anomaly in the First Step Act that redefined prior drug cases for which a defendant can get an § 851 enhancement (which increases the mandatory minimum where the defendant has certain prior drug convictions) to limit such priors to crimes punishable by more than 10 years for which the defendant was actually sentenced to more than a year. Under the 2018 bill, the change affected people sentenced under §§ 841(b)(1)(A) and (b)(1)(B), but not people sentenced under the lowest level of sentence, § 841(b)(1)(C). S.1014 applies the same “serious drug felony” definition to all three subsections.

The sleeper in S.1014 is that it would let virtually anyone sentenced under § 841(c) prior to the 2018 First Step Act seek a reduction using a procedure a lot like the Fair Sentencing Act retroactivity motions. The sheer number of motions likely to be filed might be enough to give Congress pause on this one.

usscmembers210328The bill also refines a number of Sentencing Commission goals – such as keeping down the prison population and ensuring that Guidelines don’t have adverse racial impacts. All of that would be great, but – as Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor noted last week – “currently, six of the seven voting members’ seats are vacant. The votes of at least four members are required for the Commission to promulgate amendments to the Guidelines.” The Commission has been paralyzed by lack of quorum since December 2018. The Senate has to confirm at least three new members – and none has yet been nominated by President Biden – before the Commission can do anything.

As for the two new bills, introduction hardly means approval. While Ohio State law professor Doug Berman is skeptical of their chances, he notes that “prior iterations of [the Smarter Sentencing Act] got votes in Senate Judiciary Committee from the likes of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Moreover, the current chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee is Senator Durbin and the current President campaigned on a platform that included an express promise to work for the passage of legislation to repeal mandatory minimums at the federal level. Given that commitment, Prez Biden should be a vocal supporter of this bill or should oppose it only because it does not go far enough because it merely seeks to ‘reduce mandatory minimum penalties for certain nonviolent drug offenses,’ rather than entirely eliminate them.

Committee on the Judiciary, Durbin, Lee Introduce Smarter Sentencing Act (March 26, 2021)

Congressional Record, Statements On Introduced Bills And Joint Resolutions (S.1013 and S.1014) (March 25, 2021)

Sentencing Law and Policy, Senators Durbin and Grassley re-introduce “Smarter Sentencing Act” to reduce federal drug mandatory minimums (March 26, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

Smarter Sentencing Act Back In The Senate Hopper – Update for November 19, 2019

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

SMARTER SENTENCING ACT RE-INTRODUCED IN SENATE
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)

The Smarter Sentencing Act, a bill intended to further reduce drug mandatory minimum sentences, was reintroduced in the Senate last week by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), both members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. As of the date of this report, we have no bill number to associate with the legislation.

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois)
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois)

A lot of what had been contained in prior versions of the SSA, a bill which has been introduced in every Congress since 2013, was included in the First Step Act. What the current version contains is unclear, because the text of the proposed bill has not yet been released. However, Durbin’s office said “the central remaining sentencing reform in the Lee-Durbin legislation would reduce mandatory minimum penalties for certain nonviolent drug offenses.”

In the last iteration of the bill, S.1933 (115th Congress, 2017-18), the bill proposed an expanded “safety valve” under 18 USC § 3553(f) to allow a court to impose a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum for an otherwise eligible drug offender who has three or fewer criminal history points. This change was incorporated into the First Step Act. Also, last year’s SSA reduced mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses specified in 21 USC § 841(b)(1)(A) and (b)(1)(B):

•  from 10 years to 5 years for a first-time high-level offense (e.g., one kilogram or more of heroin),

•  from 20 years to 10 years for a high-level offense after one prior felony drug offense,

•  from life to 25 years for a high-level offense after two or more prior felony drug offenses,

•  from 5 years to 2 years for a first-time low-level offense (e.g., 100 to 999 grams of heroin), and

•  from 10 years to 5 years for a low-level offense after one prior felony drug offense.

The First Step Act incorporated the life-to-25 year and the 20-to-15 year reductions, but not the remainders.

Additionally, last year’s SSA made existing mandatory minimums inapplicable to a defendant who functions a courier; and establishes new, shorter mandatory minimum prison terms for a courier.

The current version of the Smarter Sentencing Act “gives federal judges the authority to conduct individualized reviews to determine the appropriate sentences for certain nonviolent drug offenses,” Durbin said in a press release.

BILL-DOA191120Lee said, “The SSA will give judges the flexibility and discretion they need to impose stiff sentences on the most serious drug lords and cartel bosses, while enabling nonviolent offenders to return more quickly to their families and communities.”

The bill is cosponsored by ten Democratic senators, including three presidential contenders, making the likelihood it will pass in the Senate virtually zero.

The Justice Roundtable, Durbin, Lee Reintroduce Smarter Sentencing Act (Nov. 16)

– Thomas L. Root

Buyer’s Remorse Wins Confused Defendant a Hearing – Update for April 17, 2019

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

8TH CIRCUIT FLESHES OUT STANDARD FOR CHANGE-OF-PLEA INEFFECTIVENESS

One of the most-argued issues in post-conviction motions under 28 USC § 2255 is that defense counsel was ineffective. Unsurprisingly, because 94% or so of all federal criminal cases are resolved with a plea agreement and guilty plea, the most popular claim is “buyer’s remorse,” that is, that the defendant would have never pled guilty if his or her lawyer had only properly advised the accused prior to entering into the plea agreement.

buyersremorse190417I have some sympathy for the claim, but not for the obvious reason. Defense attorneys usually are right that the defendant should take a plea, and almost always, they have gotten their client the best deal possible from a chary United States Attorney. The real problems are two-fold: first, the U.S. Attorney has a script used on plea deals, and the script allows for very little negotiating room by the defendant (who, anyway, is totally outgunned by the government’s thundering herd of lawyers, legal assistants, case agents and factotums). Second, the defendant is almost always unschooled in the finer points of federal criminal law and procedure, and is under extraordinary stress as he or she bargains away in freedom, reputation and property to a rapacious and unblinking adversary. That makes misunderstanding and confusion almost inevitable.

By the time the defendant is in front of the judge for a Rule 11 guilty-plea hearing, he or she is committed to the plea deal, and is almost incapable of answering the many questions asked by the judge in any manner other than what the question anticipates and the judge expects.

It’s no wonder that a 2255 movant’s recall of the advice that counsel provided and the answers given at the Rule 11 hearing ends up being warped: it probably seems to the defendant that a different person altogether signed the plea agreement and stood up at the plea hearing.

notlistening190417But arguing that counsel poorly advised a defendant to take a plea and how to respond to the judge at a plea hearing has always been tough. Everyone knows that a defendant listens to his or her lawyer, especially when counsel is the closest thing to a friend a defendant can find in the courtroom. Besides, no one really listens to the judge at the change-of-plea hearing. Yet the defendant’s rote answers to the judge at the guilty plea hearing are invariably used by the court to bludgeon any defendant who later argues about attorney misadvice in a 2255 motion.

On top of that, a defendant has to show that if counsel had advised him or her properly, he or she would have gone to trial. For years, the courts required that the defendant show that going to trial would have been reasonable, regardless of what a defendant may have really intended.

Things improved slightly several years ago with the Supreme decision in Lee v. United States. There, a Korean restaurant owner argued that if his lawyer had told him that deportation was certain, he would have gone to trial even though he was bound to lose. The lower courts denied his 2255 on the grounds that no reasonable person would have changed his mind on the plea, because Lee had no chance of winning. The Supreme Court, however, held that courts could “look to contemporaneous evidence to substantiate a defendant’s expressed preferences,” even where those preferences were objectively unreasonable.

Dilang Dat pled guilty to robbery, but only after rejecting plea agreements that said he would be deported. The agreement he finally signed said “there are or may be collateral consequences to any conviction to include but not limited to immigration.” He agreed to plead based on counsel’s assurance his immigration status would be unaffected. Alas, counsel was terribly wrong, something Dilang learned after his conviction, when his mother’s attempt to renew his green card was denied.

The district court denied Dilang’s 2255 without a hearing, finding that he was warned in his plea agreement there could be immigration consequences. That printed warning was enough, the judge said, to undo his lawyer’s bad advice.

badadvice170201Last week, the 8th Circuit reversed. It observed that Dilang’s background supported his assertion that he was focused on remaining in the country. At the change-of-plea hearing, counsel noted Dilang’s request for prison placement close to his family, and observed that he had no ties to another country. Although Dilang faced around five more years in prison from a conviction on all counts at trial (if two counts had not been dismissed as part of the plea agreement), “deportation is a particularly severe penalty,” the Circuit opined, “which may be of greater concern to a convicted alien than any potential jail sentence.”

Nor did the language in the plea agreement undermine Dilang’s claim. The language said only that he could face deportation, not that he would do so. “A general and equivocal admonishment that defendant’s plea could lead to deportation,” the 8th said, “was insufficient to correct counsel’s affirmative misadvice that [defendant’s] crime was not categorically a deportable offense.”

The Court of Appeals sent the 2255 motion back to the district court for an evidentiary hearing.

Dat v. United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 10732 (8th Cir. Apr. 11, 2019)

– Thomas L. Root

First Step May Pass Today, But Amendment Battle Looms – Update for December 18, 2018

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

SENATE VOTES TO CLOSE DEBATE, SET FIRST STEP UP FOR A FINAL VOTE AS EARLY AS TODAY

firststepB180814The First Step Act of 2018 (S.3747), cleared a major hurdle last night, with the Senate voting 82-12 to end debate on the bill and steer the legislation to a final vote, likely scheduled for today.

Procedurally, the bill has been amended into another pending bill, formerly known as the Save Our Seas Act of 2018, S. 756. The bill is now being called the Senate Criminal Justice Reform Act.

A different version passed the House earlier this year, so the House would have to pass the Senate version, or a conference committee would have to work out a compromise before the bill would come to President Trump for a signature.

Before a final Senate vote, the bill’s 35 sponsors will have to defeat so-called “legislative poison pills” that they say are designed to kill the compromise that has been carefully negotiated among Democrats, Republicans and the Trump administration. “There are a number of members with outstanding concerns that they feel are still unresolved… The Senate will be considering amendments before we vote on final passage later this week,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) said ahead of the vote.

Look out, Sen. Cotton, here comes First Step...
Look out, Sen. Cotton, here comes First Step…

Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) and John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) will get a vote on their amendment that would bar people convicted of various offenses, including sex crimes and crimes of violence, from being able to qualify for shortened sentences, although they could still earn credits that would get them more halfway house, home confinement and in-prison privileges. The legislation already has a 50 or so exclusions, but Cotton and Kennedy want to add more crimes to the list. Sens. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pennsylvania), Jon Kyl (R-Arizona) and John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) have endorsed Cotton and Kennedy’s effort, suggesting that they, too, are uncomfortable with the underlying bill.

The Cotton-Kennedy amendment would only need a majority to pass, so some Republicans will have to band with Democratic senators to kill it. And senators who wrote the bill say there are already a number of safeguards meant to prevent violent criminals from being prematurely released.

“From the standpoint that they aren’t specifically mentioned, the answer is, that’s true, they aren’t,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said. But “the reasons they aren’t is because we think that other parts of the law cover it and also the process that somebody has to go through to get a review of their sentence, the prosecutors gotta go through that as well.”

poison pillSen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), who helped craft the deal along with Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), warned that as currently drafted that he believes Cotton’s amendments are “poison pills” meant to undercut the legislation as a whole. “The amendments that he will propose tomorrow, the senator from Arkansas, have been opposed by groups across the board, left and right, conservative, progressive, Republican, Democrat, they all oppose his amendments. …If he goes with the amendments we’ve seen, we’re going to have to do our best to oppose him,” Durbin said. 

Most if not all Democrat senators are expected to support First Step, although they emphasize that the bill alone is not enough. “It is a compromise of a compromise,” Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-California) said in a statement yesterday announcing her support for the bill. “We ultimately need to make far greater reforms if we are to right the wrongs that exist in our criminal justice system.” 

Washington Post, Criminal justice bill clears hurdle in the Senate on strong bipartisan vote (Dec. 17)

The Hill, Senate votes to end debate on criminal justice reform bill (Dec. 17)

– Thomas L. Root

LISAStatHeader2small

First Step Vote Set, But Drama Will Go To The Wire – Update for December 17, 2018

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FIRST STEP SENATE VOTES SET FOR TODAY AND WEDNESDAY

firststep1800509Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) ended the Senate’s 4-day work last Thursday night by scheduled a procedural vote on the latest revision of the First Step Act of 2018 for 5:30 p.m. today. That vote, promised weeks ago, will be a crucial test of the bill’s backing, where supporters will need to put up 60 votes to advance the bill.

In the latest iteration of First Step, the measure has been renumbered this year for the third time this year as S.3747 and has dropped its unwieldy title of “Formerly Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person Act” – and thus the need for all capital letters.

If the Monday vote is successful, the Senate leadership says First Step could be wrapped up Wednesday, after allowing opponents the opportunity to have yet amendments considered. “My impression is that people are not going to string this out unnecessarily for procedural reasons, as long as they get an opportunity to make their arguments and have a vote on their amendment,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), who announced his support for First Step this week.

Supporters say they have at least 70 votes for the measure, although cosponsors of the measure are officially at 35. Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri), a member of Senate leadership, predicted that “slightly more than half” of the GOP conference and as many as 30 of the 51 GOP senators could back it.

As McConnell set the week’s votes last Thursday, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) sought to make last-minute changes in First Step that would reflect a compromise the bill’s supporters had reached with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Cruz endorsed the bill because it was supposed to bar many violent criminals from earning early release, but the version that was presented on Wednesday (which is available online) did not include all of the exclusions Cruz had been promised. Lee tried to get McConnell to change them, according to multiple people familiar with the matter, but McConnell wanted to give his divided caucus at least 24 hours to review the new just-released text. The bill‘s chief critic, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), joined in a private meeting with McConnell, Lee and Cornyn on the Senate floor Thursday afternoon, during which Lee argued that the changes should be made to increase the bill‘s conservative support.

To get any amendments into the bill, the legislation must be amended on the Senate floor. Cruz’s endorsement was critical to moving the bill forward, and he has repeatedly touted that the legislation would no longer allow the early release of violent criminals.

senatevote181217McConnell will allow only a little time and very few amendments to First Step before the Wednesday vote. After the Senate begins debating the bill, it will ultimately take 60 votes to pass it. And an amendment, however, will require just 50 votes in the narrowly divided Senate. Cotton and Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) are expected to offer an amendment to add new exclusions to the list of inmates not allowed to get program credits. Because amendments need only a simple majority, some Republicans will have to vote against them to keep the provisions from being added to the legislation. One senator predicted that many Democrats would probably defect from the legislation if the Cotton amendment passed.

Still, First Step will pass as long as it survives an uncertain amendment process. Most Senate Democrats support it, a significant bloc of Republicans is expected to back it, and President Donald Trump is expected to sign it if it passes the Senate and House ahead of the Dec. 21 partial government shutdown deadline.

The biggest immediate impact of First Step would be felt by nearly 2,600 federal prisoners convicted of crack offenses before 2010. That’s the year the Fair Sentencing Act reduced the disparity in punishment between crack cocaine and the powdered form of the drug. First Step would make the reform retroactive.

goodconduct180509All federal inmates will benefit from an increase in good time from 47 days a year to 54 days a year, retroactive to the beginning of each inmate’s sentence. The change is estimated to result in 4,000 extra prisoners being released in the next year, some immediately.

If it passes the Senate, the House and Senate will have to reconcile their different versions of First Step and then approve the reconciled version, all before Dec. 21. Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, the House minority whip, told reporters last week, “I presume… we will be able to approve it next week. I’m hopeful that it can move that quickly.” The New York Times said House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) has pledged swift action before the House leaves town for the year-end holidays.

The Hill, McConnell sets Monday test vote on criminal justice bill (Dec. 13)

Politico, GOP infighting continues as criminal justice bill advances (Dec. 13)

The Hill, Senate heads toward floor fight on criminal justice bill (Dec. 14)

The Marshall Project, What’s Really in the First Step Act? (Nov. 16)

First Step Act of 2018, S.3747 (Dec. 12)

The New York Times, Criminal Justice Bill Will Go Up for a Vote, McConnell Says (Dec. 12)

– Thomas L. Root
LISAStatHeader2small

Progress on FIRST STEP, or Just Generating Heat Without Light? – Update for December 10, 2018

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FIRST STEP GETS KNOCKED DOWN, BUT IT GETS UP AGAIN, CAN MCCONNELL EVER KEEP IT DOWN?

The lyrics from “Tubthumping,” Chumbawamba’s 1997 hit, describe the FIRST STEP Act’s week. The bill got knocked down early in the week by inaction and demagoguery, to the point that pundits were writing the bill’s obituary last Thursday. But the prison and sentencing reform act stumbled back up again on Friday, with three surprisingly positive developments.

chumba181210FIRST STEP is still far from being passed, but the pressure (for a change) is on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) instead of on the bill’s supporters. Sen. John Thune (R-South Dakota) seemed to signal that McConnell may yield to pressure. On Face the Nation yesterday, Sen. Thune said of FIRST STEP, “There are timing issues associated with it but there – at the moment at least there are still some substantive issues that are being resolved. I think if they get that worked out, if they can attract the support of more Republican Senators, there – there’s still an opportunity I think for that to be finished this year, but if not obviously it – it will be taken up again next year-”

The big news of the week came late on Friday, when President Trump decided to check back in on the bill, and pressured McConnell to bring FIRST STEP to a vote during the crowded lame duck session. After going mostly silent on the bill for several weeks, Trump singled McConnell out on Friday on his Twitter feed:

tweet181210

Trump’s public demands do not guarantee McConnell will bring the bill to a vote. He has told Trump several times that the Senate calendar is too cluttered in December to take up a bill that divides Republicans. As late as Thursday, McConnell had not mentioned the bill at either of two GOP senator meeting, and he has reportedly told senators there’s almost no window to take up the bill this year, according to multiple GOP sources.

One McConnell adviser said the senator does not intend to have a vote on the legislation because he does not have enough time and is more focused on other things — like funding the government and confirming judges. “He doesn’t like the bill,” the Washington Post reported Republican donor Doug Deason, a key White House ally, said of McConnell’s view of FIRST STEP. “He’s a Jeff Sessions-style, lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key kind of guy.”

mcconnell180219White House officials say McConnell doesn’t want a vote unless the overwhelming majority of Republicans will vote for it — although both Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) said that 28 or 30 GOP senators support the bill. There are 51 Senate Republicans, and nearly all of the 49 Senate Democrats are expected to back it.

McConnell complained at a Wall Street Journal event last week that such a bill requires a week or ten days to consider, while there are only two weeks left before the planned holiday recess and budget bills that must be passed. FIRST STEP advocates argue that it would only take a few days, with a cloture vote capping debate at 30 hours. McConnell acknowledged support on both sides of the aisle but called the legislation “extremely divisive inside the Senate Republican conference,” with more members undecided or opposed than in favor.

“That’s his calling card, protecting his conference,” said Kevin Ring, president of FAMM. The Atlantic suggested yesterday that while past majority leaders like Lyndon Johnson might have strong-armed their members, McConnell waits for near-unanimity among Senate Republicans. “I think he’s not just looking for 60 votes,” said Brett Tolman, a former U.S. Attorney in Utah who also worked as a GOP Senate staffer and now advocates for criminal-justice reform. “He’s looking for a majority of Republicans.”

But it's not a bad thing.
                   But it’s not a bad thing.

Earlier in the week, FIRST STEP opponents Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) seemed to be on a roll, denouncing FIRST STEP as giving immediate release to sexual predators, drug kingpins and gun-toting gangbangers. But Friday, just before Trump’s renewed support,     Sen. Cruz flipped, issuing a press release pledging support:

“I have long supported criminal justice reform. I believe in reducing mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders, and providing greater opportunities for offenders to be rehabilitated. At the same time, I do not believe we should be granting early release to violent offenders.

“That is why I drafted an amendment that would exclude violent offenders from being released early. I’m happy to report that, after working closely with the White House and the sponsors of this bill, they have decided to accept my amendment. This new version of the bill resolves my concerns, and is one that I wholeheartedly support and cosponsor.”

firststep180814Also, last Friday a leading FIRST STEP opponent announced his support of key planks of the legislation. Larry Leiser, president of the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, told the Washington Examiner he supports in principle three of four major sentencing reforms included in FIRST STEP.

The possible turning of the tide seems to have little effect on McConnell’s reluctance to hold a vote. He has angered some GOP senators and created an unusual rift with Sen. Grassley, a longtime McConnell ally. Grassley has spent years building a coalition around FIRST STEP and is pushing hard for a vote this year. “We’ve done what needs to be done,” Grassley said about the overwhelming support for the bill. “So what’s holding it up?”

On Friday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) intervened, talking directly to President Trump about attaching the criminal justice legislation to the must-pass year-end spending bill, which is already tangled in a separate fight over funds for the border wall with Mexico. “Just talked with President,” Graham tweeted. “He strongly believes criminal justice reform bill must pass now. He also indicated he supports putting criminal justice reform bill on year-end spending bill which must include MORE wall funding.”

The spending bill will need approval by Dec. 21 to avoid a funding lapse days before Christmas.

On Thursday, Sen. Lee said there were 28 hard “yes” Republican votes plus 49 Democrats for the bill. “It’s rock-solid,” he said. But Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the Senate Republican whip, said more Republicans needed to be convinced. “Right now we have a majority of the Republican conference either undecided or no,” he told reporters. He also continued to call for some changes to the bill.

reefer181210Despite Sen. Lee’s assurance that he has 49 Democrat votes in favor of FIRST STEP, The Hill reported Wednesday Democrats who are mulling 2020 presidential bids have split over whether to support FIRST STEP. The decision to support or oppose the bill is a significant policy decision for 2020 Democrat candidates.

Among Republican senators, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) told CNN that there’s a generational divide within the party on the issue. “I think there are people who were teenagers in 1937 watching ‘Reefer Madness’ and they’re still concerned that Reefer Madness is going to take over and everybody is going to become zombies, hacking and killing everyone if they smoke pot,” said Sen. Paul, a FIRST STEP supporter. “And then there are a couple of generations after 1937 of people who don’t see it with the same degree of evil.”

The Atlantic, Mitch McConnell Appears to Be Killing Bipartisan Sentencing Reform (Dec. 9)

Politico, Trump leans on McConnell to vote on criminal justice reform (Dec. 7)

The Hill, Criminal justice reform splits 2020 Democrats (Dec. 5)

Washington Examiner, Trump pushes Congress to pass floundering sentencing reform bill (Dec. 7)

Washington Post, McConnell tells White House little chance of Senate vote on criminal justice bill (Dec. 6)

Pittsburgh Tribune, McConnell blocks sentencing bill, upsetting Grassley, GOP (Dec. 7)

– Thomas L. Root

LISAStatHeader2small

Still Some Life Left in FIRST STEP? – Update for November 26, 2018

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FELLOW REPUBLICANS URGE MCCONNELL TO PUT FIRST STEP TO A VOTE

intimidation181126Republican senators last week put a full-court press on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) to bring the modified FIRST STEP Act to the Senate floor before Congress adjourns for the year on Dec. 14. 

[Update: The Senate Judiciary Committee reported the modified FIRST STEP Act, now S.3649, to the floor on Monday, November 26, 2018].

McConnell has been coy about the bill’s prospects, even with the backing of President Donald Trump and his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner. McConnell’s intransigence in the face of Trump’s urging and the demands of his own party could open a new divide between McConnell and Trump weeks after they worked together to widen the Senate majority in the midterm elections.

If the Senate does not pass FIRST STEP in the next two weeks, the bill would have to be reintroduced in January, and would a Democrat-controlled House that would probably include a lot of sentencing reform provisions that would be non-starters in the Senate.

“This really does need to get done this year,” Sen. Mike Lee (R – Utah) said in an interview. “Saying that we’ll do it next year is tantamount to saying this just isn’t going to get done.”

In general, McConnell doesn’t like voting on legislation that divides Senate Republicans. FIRST STEP has been controversial among a few conservative Republicans for months, even sparking a Twitter argument between Lee and Sen. Tom Cotton (R – Arkansas), last Monday.

“Unaccountable politicians and those who live behind armed guards may be willing to gamble with your life,”  Cotton wrote in a USA Today op-ed piece Nov. 15. “But why should you?”

cotton171226And Sen. John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) argued earlier this month, “A dangerous person who is properly incarcerated can’t mug your sister. If we’re not careful with this, somebody is going to get killed.”

In the past three years, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, blocked a Democratic Supreme Court nominee, pushed through an army of conservative judges and secured confirmation two Trump nominees.

Grassley had some chits to call in when he spoke to McConnell last Monday morning about FIRST STEP. I have been there for you, Grassley told McConnell, and I would hope this is something that you would help me make happen, the New York Times reported that three people familiar with the call said.

Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) told NBC a week ago that he’s confident FIRST STEP would receive 80 votes in the Senate, and would be a positive first step for the government in the wake of a contentious midterm election cycle. “Let’s start 2019 on a positive note,” Graham said. “I’m urging Sen. McConnell to bring the bill to the floor of the Senate. It would get 80 votes. Mr. President, pick up the phone and push the Republican leadership… The Republicans are the problem here, not the Democrats.”

FIRST STEP proponents fear McConnell will let the short window for consideration this year slide shut rather let a vote go forward on a complicated issue that divides Republicans. Republican senators allied with Grassley, including Lee, Graham and Tim Scott of South Carolina, began last week to contact wavering colleagues by phone. Kushner convened a call with business groups to praise the changes, and the White House circulated a USA Today op-ed that Kushner wrote with Tomas J. Philipson, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, the president’s eldest son and daughter, blasted supportive messages to their millions of Twitter followers urging Congress to move quickly.

firststepslamduck181126Kushner reportedly plans to ask Trump to lobby McConnell directly by phone, but is waiting to line up more Republican support first, according to two people familiar with his thinking. Trump is not waiting for Kushner’s request, already using Twitter last Friday to urge McConnell and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to pass the “badly needed” criminal justice reform bill.

McConnell has not yet budged. In a statement Friday, a spokesman for McConnell told The New York Times: “The support for, and length of time needed to move the new bill is not knowable at this moment.”

Earlier this month, McConnell told the Louisville Courier Journal, “We don’t have a whole lot of time left, but the first step is to finalize what proponents are actually for. There have been a lot of different versions floating around. And then we’ll whip it and see where the vote count is.”

Wall Street Journal, McConnell Controls Fate of Criminal-Justice Overhaul Bill (Nov. 20, 2018)

CNBC, Trump pushes Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer to pass ‘badly needed’ bipartisan criminal justice reform bill that’s stalled in the Senate (Nov. 23, 2018)


The New York Times, McConnell Feels the Heat From the Right to Bring Criminal Justice Bill to a Vote (Nov. 20, 2018)

The Hill, Graham urges GOP leadership to bring vote on criminal justice reform (Nov. 18, 2018)

– Thomas L. Root

LISAStatHeader2small