From Deseret News archives:

End mandatory sentences

Published: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:15 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Unless he receives a presidential pardon, Utahn Weldon Angelos likely won't be released from federal prison until he is an old man.

Angelos, who was sentenced in 2004 to 55 years in prison for selling small amounts of marijuana while carrying a handgun, is the textbook example of an unjust federal sentencing scheme. Under federal guidelines, Angelos will serve more prison time than a rapist, a kidnapper or an airplane hijacker. He'll serve more time than someone convicted of second-degree murder.

Had Angelos been charged for his crimes in state court, he likely would have served about eight years for his offenses, his attorneys have said. The difference is, state court judges are allowed to judge. They are not bound by cookie-cutter guidelines that preclude them from taking into account mitigating or aggravating factors or other information as they impose a sentence.

Story continues below
It's interesting that federal lawmakers, some of whom on occasion deride "activist judges," do not recognize how mandatory minimum sentences hamstring federal judges. It speaks volumes that the judge who sentenced Angelos, U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell of Salt Lake City, continues to speak out on this issue. Earlier this week, Cassell addressed a House Judiciary Committee on the matter, remarking that "mandatory minimum sentences mean one-size-fits-all injustice."

Federal prosecutors disagree. They say minimum mandatory sentences deter criminal behavior, ensure uniform sentences for similarly situated offenders and enhance public safety by incapacitating dangerous offenders for long periods of time.

No question, it's difficult to re-offend if one is serving 50 years in prison. And an argument could be made that some would-be criminals may be dissuaded from committing crimes if they know they will face a long federal prison stretch. It's doubtful, however, that most criminals apply cost-benefit analyses to their prospective illegal activities.

Most will become aware of the possibility of a very long prison sentence once they are charged with their respective crimes. Once convicted, judges are bound by the sentencing guidelines. In Angelos' case, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his sentence, ruling that it was Congress' intent to severely punish crimes involving guns and drugs. The Supreme Court has refused to take up the matter.

So the remedy for this needs to be legislative. Congress needs to roll back the mandatory minimum scheme and permit a judge to use all of the facts before him or her when imposing a sentence. This should not be viewed as a power grab on the part of judiciary. It's a matter of justice

Recent comments

This sentence is ridiculous and shows just how corrupt our justice...

Anonymous | Aug. 23, 2007 at 7:11 p.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

RSL's Rimando makes 3

Not good at crosses Too short Too unreliable right... Did anyone...

TCU creams U.

for later. after the rivalry game then we can say we know who is better....

RSL's Rimando makes 3

So Great!!! So Proud - Love RSL - Bring Home The CUP!!!!!

mr cannon's bold assertation that the purpose of the first ammendemnt as...

RSL heads to MLS title game

Great great great game!!!! Nicky Rimando is a god! We're the most complete...

I had the game on DVR and just watched it. That was the most exciting game...

RSL heads to MLS title game

financially cannot this year, but I will watch loyally, how great to hear...

This is hardly surprising. Bennett has a remarkable arrogance which is also...

RSL heads to MLS title game

I guess that is why "they play the game" as Herman Edwards would say.. ...

BYU happy to escape with victory

What was the score of the LSU vs LA tech game? Alot closer than you'd like to...

Advertisements
Advertisement