Pubdate: Wed, 02 Jul 2014
Source: Washington Times (DC)
Copyright: 2014 The Washington Times, LLC.
Contact:  http://www.washingtontimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/492
Author: Jim McElhatton
Page: A10

CIVIL LIBERTARIANS SEEK REVIEW OF HARSH DRUG SENTENCE

Groups Ask Supreme Court to Weigh in on Federal Judges' Power

Two prominent civil libertarian groups have filed a joint petition 
asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case of a D.C. man 
serving nearly 19 years in prison after his conviction on a $600 drug 
deal, citing concerns about "carte blanche" powers given to federal judges.

The amicus brief by the Cato and Rutherford institutes comes as the 
Justice Department faces a July 28 deadline to file its brief in the 
appeals case of Antwuan Ball and two others convicted of drug charges 
in a federal trial in the District in 2008.

Attorneys for all three men - Ball, Desmond Thurston and Joseph Jones 
- - accuse the trial judge of overreach by finding facts at sentencing 
that jurors expressly rejected in their verdict.

Sentencing judges are permitted to take into account charged conduct 
against defendants that jurors rejected or never considered at trial. 
But the appeals lawyers say all three defendants received 
"unreasonably lengthy" sentences based on charges that jurors 
rejected and that the judge accepted.

Ball was acquitted of murder, racketeering, conspiracy and other 
felonies, but he was found guilty of a lone hand-to-hand drug deal. 
At Ball's sentencing, however, U.S. District Judge Richard Roberts 
said he felt the evidence showed Ball belonged to a conspiracy - a 
key finding that led to a much longer sentence than what Ball would 
have faced otherwise.

"Sentencing then becomes the real trial, with the judge being given 
carte blanche to engage as fact finder," the civil liberties groups 
wrote. "This is constitutionally improper."

Sentencing expert Douglas Berman, a law professor at Ohio University, 
also has filed an amicus brief on behalf of Ball, Thurston and Jones. 
He wrote that Judge Roberts embraced the Justice Department's 
position that all three belonged to a conspiracy "despite a jury 
verdict directly to the contrary," a finding that tripled or 
quadrupled their sentences.

Sentencing Ball more than three years after his trial ended, Judge 
Roberts said he respected the jury's verdict but still couldn't 
ignore what he called "clear and convincing" evidence that Ball was 
part of a conspiracy to deal crack cocaine in the Congress Park 
section of Southeast Washington.

The Ball case was the subject of a series of articles in The 
Washington Times in recent years. The case was notable because it 
offered a rare glimpse into the perspective of a juror on sentencing. 
Retired federal economist Jim Caron wrote a letter to Judge Roberts 
after he found out prosecutors were seeking lengthy prison sentences 
for the defendants.

"It seems to me a tragedy that one is asked to serve on a jury, 
serves, but then finds their work may not be given the credit it 
deserves," Mr. Caron wrote in his letter.

The Supreme Court challenge comes months after the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit turned down the defendants' appeal. All 
three men are serving sentences between 15 and 18 years.

Steve Leckar, an attorney for Ball, said the appeals team is pleased 
it's gotten support from the Cato and Rutherford institutes and Mr. 
Berman, "who filed briefs urging the Supreme Court to take the case 
and find it fundamentally wrong to punish an offender based on an 
offense that a jury didn't conclude had been violated."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom