Source: Associated Press Pubdate: 20 Oct 1997 Court to Clarify Drug Crime Rule By Laurie Asseo Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) The Supreme Court today agreed to clarify the rules for sentencing people convicted of federal drug crimes when a single conspiracy charge involves more than one type of drug. The court said it will hear arguments by five Illinois men who say they should get shorter prison terms when one charge involves multiple drugs that ordinarily call for differing sentences. Alternatively, the men seek a new trial. Vincent Edwards, Reynolds A. Wintersmith, Horace Joiner, Karl V. Fort and Joseph Tidwell were charged in June 1993 with being part of a drugselling conspiracy based in Rockford, Ill. A jury convicted all five of a single charge of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute the powder and crack forms of cocaine. Under federal sentencing guidelines, sentences are much tougher for people convicted of possessing crack cocaine than the powder variety. Fort and Wintersmith were sentenced to life in prison, while the other three were given prison sentences ranging from 10 years to 26 years. On appeal, the five argued they should have been given shorter sentences based on a powder cocaine offense because it was unclear whether the jury found them guilty of possessing powder or crack cocaine. But the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld their sentences last January. It is up to the judge, not the jury, to decide what drugs were involved and in what amount, the appeals court said. The appeal acted on today contended that at least five other federal appeals courts have ruled that when someone is convicted of a single conspiracy charge involving multiple drugs, they must receive the lesser of the possible sentences or get a new trial. Justice Department lawyers said the 7th Circuit court ruled correctly but urged the justices to grant review and resolve the conflicting rulings in lower courts. The case is Edwards vs. U.S., 968732. © Copyright 1997 The Associated Press