F A M I L I E S A G A I N S T M A N D A T O R Y M I N I M U M S
Issue 1 | Volume 16
espite the turmoil, optimism, and dire predictions wrought
D by the Supreme Court’s Booker decision in January 2005,
one year later sentencing remains largely unchanged.
This is good or bad, depending on mandatory minimums and
your perspective. For example, those long sentences.
interested in maintaining advisory
Although advisory sen-
guidelines might be heartened by the
tencing guidelines have re-
news that judges are sentencing much
placed the once-mandatory
as before, depriving Congress of an ex-
cuse to make guidelines mandatory
thanks to the Booker deci-
again. However, those critical of the
sion, the future of the advi-
sentencing guidelines may wish that
sory guidelines remains un-
judges were ignoring them more now
certain. It is rumored that
that they have the power to do so.
the Department of Justice
Some people may borrow a bit will soon ask Congress to
from both perspectives: in their make the guidelines
hearts they want judges to have mandatory again, while some in Con- Booker, such as “what is a reasonable
guidelines coupled with judicial dis- gress attempt to circumvent advisory sentence and why does it matter?”
cretion and more protections for de- guidelines by enacting laws with (continued on page 7)
fendants. But it’s scary to ask for such mandatory sentences. Meanwhile, the
thoughtful mandatory guidelines in a courts continue to address the press-
political culture still addicted to ing issues raised but not resolved by
Post-Booker sentences change little law changes
In the aggregate, sentencing continues much as before, albeit with a small drop in
the overall number of “within-guideline” sentences. Sentences within the guideline
afoot in N.J.
range fluctuated between 64 percent of all federal sentences in 2001 to 72 percent in
2004 (prior to the Blakely opinion in June). Since Booker, the within-guideline rate fell
F AMM’sNew Jersey’scampaign to
slightly from the 2001 figure of 64 percent to a rate of 61.2 percent. school-zone laws just got an important
The rate of below-guideline sentences sought by the government climbed (in part boost. The N.J. Commission on Crimi-
due to new “fast-track” departure authority) from a low of 17.1 percent in 2001 to a nal Sentencing finally released its long-
high of 22.2 percent in 2003. In 2005, they reached a five-year high of 24.4 percent. In awaited report on the school-zone law
other words, nearly a quarter of all defendants in 2005 received sentences lower than that requires a three-year mandatory
the guidelines because the government sought a departure. Government sponsored de- minimum sentence for anyone selling
partures play a greater role in the national rate of below-guideline sentences than any drugs within 1,000 feet of a school or
other factor. school bus. While the law sounds rea-
sonable it has many flaws, including its
Meanwhile, judges on their own departed or otherwise sentenced below the guide- disproportionate impact on people of
lines in only 12.8 percent of cases in 2005. This figure is significantly lower than the
18.3 percent departure rate recorded in 2001 and higher than the 7.2 percent in 2003.
color (see report side bar).
The release of the report prompted
(continued on page 15)
G Spring 2006
FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS
1 Booker revisited
Sentencing remains largely unchanged in the year since Booker decision.
FAMM since 1991
School-zone changes afoot in New Jersey
Mission: To abolish harsh and unjust Commission report gives boost to reform of New Jersey’s harsh
mandatory sentencing laws and restore school-zone laws.
judicial discretion to fit the punishment
to the crime. 8 Julie Stewart receives Citizen Activist Award
Gleitsman Foundation honors FAMM founder and president.
Julie Stewart President 16 Thanks for your help
Monica Pratt Raffanel Director of operations Contributions to FAMM’s annual December fundraising drive reach
Laura Sager National campaign
20 Where are they now?
Mary Price General counsel Two who received commutations from President Clinton make new
Lani Poblete Director of
lives for themselves.
Angelyn Frazer Organizing director DEPARTMENTS
Tammi Coles Development director
4 Federal news
Andrea Strong Director of member Review of legislation, past and future; Sentencing Commission seeks
services sentence increase; expert committee finds deficiencies in sentencing
LaFonda Jones-General N.C. project director guidelines; proposed bill would drop prison phone costs; Congress lifts
ban on aid to some students with drug convictions.
Dea DeWitt N.J. project director
Jim Cho Federal policy analyst 9 Is justice being served?
What kind of sentences would you have given Alva Mae Groves and
Betsy Atkinson Case researcher
Jody Goulden Staff writer
Tom Burkert Administrator
10 State news
McConico introduces reform package in Michigan; reports from
Nina Cannon D.C. office manager North Carolina, Massachusetts, Kansas and Maryland.
Karen Garrison D.C. office assistant
Peter Ninemire Organizer FAMM asks Supreme Court to review good-time issue and crack
sentences face new scrutiny in federal courts.
FAMM members use tax day to educate on sentencing laws, spread the
word about FAMM.
FAMM National Office
19 Prison news
1612 K Street, NW, Suite 700 Litigation continues on halfway house eligibility; VA provides programs
Washington, DC 20006 for transitioning veterans; thanks to Pekin women for $680 contribution;
(202) 822-6700 sisters offer women a transitional home; and new prison guidebook helps
fax (202) 822-6704 understand the system.
See back cover for contact information on
FAMM’s state offices in Michigan,
New Jersey and North Carolina.
he one-year anniversary of the Booker decision to help returning prisoners make the return home suc-
T – the biggest shake up in sentencing in 20 years
– came and went without much fanfare (see
cover story). Sentencing practice did not fall into chaos
cessful. (See the FAMM website, www.famm.org, for up-
After 15 years at FAMM, I still “feel your pain.”
during the past year, as some predicted; nor did Booker
The letters and notes I receive from those in prison and
offer avoidance of prison time, as some had hoped. The
their families are a constant reminder of why I do this
quiet passage of the anniversary could almost lull peo-
work. Sentences are too long, too rigid, and too de-
ple into believing that the current sentencing guidelines
structive. Judges need discretion to sentence the indi-
are here to stay. But that would be a mistake. We know
vidual, not just the crime. That’s why FAMM fights
that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has developed a Julie Stewart hard to beat any guidelines that seek to restrict judges
new sentencing guideline system and it will likely be in- FAMM President
further. That’s why we chip away at mandatory mini-
troduced in Congress very soon. From what we know of
mum sentences, which completely tie judges’ hands.
DOJ, these guidelines would be a step backward, not forward, by lim-
iting judicial discretion except discretion to make sentences harsher. Changing sentencing laws is long, hard work. We have had
successes that have affected the sentences of tens of thousands of
I guess that’s no surprise, but it’s very unsettling. How much
people, but there is always more to do. However, sometimes it’s im-
time is too much? How long must someone be in prison to “get the
portant to stop and acknowledge the work FAMM has done in the
message” that his/her behavior was illegal and that he/she needs to
past 15 years, so we are planning an anniversary dinner in Wash-
change? Legislators in this country (and many people, in general)
ington, D.C., this fall. This year also happens to be the 20th an-
have completely lost sight of what a year in prison means to an
niversary of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which we will not
individual and his or her family, let alone five, 10 or 20 years. Sen-
“celebrate” but we will mark by holding a sentencing forum follow-
tencing inflation is so out of control that 15 years in prison for sell-
ing FAMM’s anniversary dinner. Details of both events will be on
ing drugs to a willing buyer is now considered normal by some.
our website and in a future issue of the FAMMGram.
When I first started FAMM, 15 years ago, I received a letter from a
Finally, thank you for making our December 2005 fundraising
prisoner who wondered how his long sentence would affect him. He
drive the most successful ever! We raised $78,000, which was
wrote, “After 17 years behind bars, what kind of man will emerge…?”
matched by three anonymous donors! Every stamp and every dollar
I think of him often as I hear from people leaving prison after a
we receive help FAMM keep fighting for the sentencing justice we
decade or more. I don’t know how society expects people to re-enter
the flow without a hitch. One glimmer of reason, the Second Chance
Act, enjoys bi-partisan support in the U.S. Congress for its measures
Laura Sager, FAMM national campaign director, was cited in LaFonda Jones-General, North Carolina FAMM project di-
a November Detroit Free Press article, “Fix the Lifer Law.” Laura rector, was quoted by the Associated Press in Raleigh in a No-
was also interviewed by the Macomb Daily, a local Michigan vember article on prison overcrowding in North Carolina. The
newspaper, on Michigan prisoner Larry Drum’s continued ef- Durham News quoted her that same week when she spoke out
forts to seek a pardon from Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm. personally about 50 Cent, a popular rapper, and his movie, “Get
(See Winter 2005 FAMMGram.) Rich or Die Tryin:” “The movie and the rapper’s music send the
In December, Laura Sager was quoted in The Record, a New Jer- wrong message: that selling drugs and living a violent lifestyle is
sey newspaper: “It is extremely important for a state to have an ob- the road to success.”
jective, data-driven approach to the fairness and proportionality of FAMM was also cited in several newspapers throughout the
sentencing.” This came in response to and in support of recom- country on issues from prison crowding in North Carolina to
mendations by the New Jersey Commission to Review Sentencing the appeal of Weldon Angelos’ 55-year sentence in November.
to shrink drug-free school zones from 1,000 feet to 200 feet.
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 3
FEDERAL LEGISLATION Back to the futu
or sentencing reform, the year 2005 in Congress created considerable angst but little action. The House
of Representatives responded to the end of mandatory sentencing guidelines with a host of bills laden
with mandatory minimums, but, thankfully, FAMM’s hard work bore fruit when key House Republicans
ameliorated some of the harshest provisions. While we wait to see what the Department of Justice plans to do
about Booker, 2006 is sure to be interesting.
Legislation develops in fits and starts, and FAMM sometimes needs members to respond member rapidly to devel-
opments. You can keep in touch with changes and how you can help by going to the FAMM website, www.famm.org,
signing up for e-alerts (do this on the website), attending chapter meetings and reading the FAMMGram.
Booker fix But his proposal was so roundly con- 1279, a harsh anti-gang measure, the many
demned that he decided against bringing it and increased mandatory minimums in his
2005. The big news in federal sen-
to a vote in his own committee. Opinions bill were necessary because the Supreme
tencing legislation is what did not happen:
were nearly unanimous that everyone Court made the guidelines advisory, not
2005 did not see the introduction of seri-
should wait to see what the courts would mandatory. Therefore, he said, mandatory
ous legislation to “fix” the Supreme Court’s
do with their newfound freedom. Not sur- minimums were needed to fill the gap.
decision in United States v. Booker. Follow-
prisingly, it appears they are sentencing
ing the Court’s split opinion that declared Here are some of the bills we saw last
much as they did before Booker. (See
the sentencing guidelines unconstitutional session:
“Booker Revisited,” page 1.)
and then immediately rescued them by H.R. 1279, the “Gang Prevention and
making them advisory, rumors flew that The bottom line: H.R. 1528 lies
Community Protection Act of 2005” cre-
the Justice Department and Congress dormant and will likely not go to the
ated many new federal crimes, raised exist-
would quickly introduce legislation to re- House Judiciary Committee or the full
ing mandatory minimums, created 24 new
store mandatory guidelines. House. The Senate does not have a compa-
ones and rewrote the definitions of “crime
Indeed, Rep. James Sensenbrenner of violence” and “criminal street gang” in
(R-Wis.), chair of the House Judiciary Prediction: FAMM understands the ways designed to radically alter the federal
Committee, introduced a radical drug sen- Department of Justice is finalizing a legisla- criminal code. (See “Bill says drug crimes
tencing bill (H.R. 1528) to harden the tive proposal to reinstate mandatory sen- ‘violent’,” Summer 2005 FAMMGram, page
guidelines, add a host of new mandatory tencing guidelines. These “soft-top” or “top- 6.) Though 21 Republicans joined many
sentences and eliminate the safety valve. less” guidelines would make the tops of the Democrats to defeat the bill, it passed the
(See “Bills with mandatory minimums on current guideline ranges advisory but not House.
the rise,” Fall 2005 FAMMGram, page 8.) the bottoms. It would then be easy for judges
Meanwhile, the Senate prepared to con-
to increase sentences but difficult to sentence
sider S. 155, the “Gang Prevention and Ef-
below a guideline range. Any such proposal
fective Deterrence Act of 2005,” which
is bound to generate much opposition.
contained fewer, but nonetheless serious,
new mandatory provisions. (See “Bills with
The other Booker fix: mandatory mandatory minimums on the rise,” Fall
minimums everywhere 2005 FAMMGram, page 8.) Co-sponsor
While Booker-fix legislation did not suc- Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) withdrew
ceed in 2005, sentencing conservatives in the bill before the Senate Judiciary Com-
the House introduced a series of bills that mittee could take it up and then sought to
included many new mandatory minimums develop support for a substitute measure.
and some new crimes. According to Rep. She did not introduce a new bill before the
Randy Forbes (R-Va), who introduced H.R. Senate recessed in December.
4 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
The bottom line: Congress did not Children Act of 2005,” containing many minimums. It passed the House Judiciary
pass new gang legislation this year. mandatory minimums for violent crimes Committee and was “attached,” with the
and sex offenses against children but fewer Senate Judiciary’s concurrence, to the Pa-
Prediction: We might see a new gang
than in the House bill. The Senate Judiciary triot Act. Congress did not pass the new
bill introduced in the Senate that, while not
Committee sent the bill to the Senate floor, Patriot Act in 2005; instead the current Pa-
as harsh as the current bill, will contain
but it did not come up for a vote. triot Act, without the methamphetamine
provisions FAMM could oppose. Because
section, was reauthorized in December for
of the Senate’s full schedule it is unclear The bottom line: Congress did not
just over a month and in January was reau-
how much attention will be focused on pass new sex crimes legislation this year.
thorized again for five weeks.
gang and other criminal jus-
tice bills. Omnibus crime legisla- The bottom line: Congress did not
tion. In the meantime, the vote in 2005 on a methamphetamine bill.
H.R. 1751, the “Secure House Judiciary Committee However, Congress passed the Patriot Act
Access to Justice and Court Chairman Sensenbrenner in- in February with the methamphetamine
Protection Act,” responded troduced a bill in December sections.
to high profile attacks containing leaner versions of
H.R. 4437, the “Border Protection, An-
against judges. It contained the gang, court security and
titerrorism and Illegal Immigration Con-
new mandatory penalties for sex crimes bills that the
trol Act of 2005” emerged suddenly in the
a variety of threatening and harmful acts. House had already passed. A number of
final weeks of the year in the House Judi-
The House passed the bill after several Re- the mandatory minimums sought in the
ciary Committee. Sponsored by Chairman
publican members removed some of the original bills were removed from the om-
Sensenbrenner, the bill was extremely con-
mandatory penalties. The Senate bill, S. nibus, presumably to make the bill more
troversial, not due to its mandatory sen-
168, the Court Security Improvement palatable for the Senate, which lacks the
tencing provisions that would have targeted
Act, contains none of the mandatory sen- House propensity for mandatory mini-
not only those illegally in the country but
tencing provisions of the House version. mums. The House failed to consider H.R.
those who helped them, even for the best of
The Senate Judiciary Committee has not 4472, the Child Safety and Violent Crime
reasons. Republicans and Democrats were
voted on it. Reduction Act, before its December ad-
internally divided over the breadth of the
The bottom line: Congress did not bill and its failure to address the status of
pass a court security bill this year. The bottom line: The House did current migrants or provide for a guest
not vote on H.R. 4472. worker or status adjustment program.
Prediction: The Senate may take up
a court security bill in 2006 but it is likely Prediction: Chairman Sensenbren- Nonetheless, the House passed the bill in
to differ greatly from the House bill. ner is likely to promote H.R. 4472 in the the final days of the session but the Senate
House early this year. did not take it up. The Senate considered no
H.R. 3132, the “Protecting Children’s immigration bill of its own this year.
Safety Act of 2005,” included many new H.R. 3889, the “Methamphetamine Epi- The bottom line: Congress did not
mandatory penalties for a variety of crimes demic Elimination Act of 2005” rode the pass immigration reform.
against or involving children and included wave of methamphetamine hysteria sweep-
Prediction: The Senate is likely to
new minimum penalties for other conduct, ing the country. Originally, the bill would
hold hearings about immigration reform
such as failure to register as a sex offender have changed current penalties so that a
in the spring; however it is unlikely to pro-
and Internet offenses. The House approved mere three grams of methamphetamine
duce a bill even remotely like the one
H.R. 3132 and sent it to the Senate. would trigger a five-year sentence and five
passed by the House.
grams a 10-year one. A bipartisan effort on
The Senate Judiciary Committee con-
the House Judiciary Committee, however,
sidered several similar bills before finally
produced a much-improved, though not
settling on S. 1086, the “Jetseta Gage Pre-
perfect, bill without any new mandatory
vention and Deterrence of Crimes Against
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 5
Commission seeks sentence increases
T he U.S. Sentencing Commission’s
proposed amendments to the federal
Last year, the commission told us that its
2006 priorities included continuing its
providing for early release for extraordinary
and compelling circumstances (a provision
sentencing guidelines are a disappointing work on the crack cocaine sentencing struc- seldom used); and neglects any effort at
set of business-as-usual sentence increases ture, promulgating long-overdue guidance even modest structural reform.
for a range of offenses, many of which al- on compassionate release and examining The commission’s proposed guideline
ready carry very stiff sentences. certain structural issues that lead to sharply amendments are available at www.ussc.gov.
Sadly absent are any mention of a guide- increased sentences at the top of the guide- Comments are due March 28 for all pro-
line proposal concerning the disparity be- lines. Reforms in these areas could result in posals except steroids, which had a Febru-
tween crack and powder cocaine sentencing sentence length reductions. ary deadline. The commission must for-
and any effort to reduce sentences or sim- Alas, the current set of proposals fails to ward proposed guideline amendments to
plify the guidelines. mention or reform crack cocaine sentenc- Congress on May 1, 2006.
Also omitted from the proposals is even a ing; does little more than restate the statute
nod to the fresh thinking that has emerged
since the release of United States v. Booker
launched a wholesale reconsideration of the
guidelines by critics and supporters alike.
Expert committee finds deficiencies
(See “Expert committee,” this page.)
in sentencing guidelines
The proposed amendments would,
among other things, increase sentences for
alien smuggling, immigration document
A n expert committee organized by by
Constitution Project and headed
The commission itself has acknowledged
its own role in lengthening prison terms.
fraud, illegal reentry into the United States, former Reagan attorney general Edwin Comparing incarceration rates before
various firearm offenses and steroid of- Meese and former Clinton deputy attorney and after the implementation of the sen-
fenses. Apparently not sure that drug sen- general Philip B. Heymann examined fed- tencing guidelines, the commission wrote:
tences are lengthy enough already, the com- eral sentencing following Booker and iden- “The rate of imprisonment for longer
mission’s steroid package includes proposed tified several deficiencies in the sentencing lengths of time climbed dramatically
enhancements that the commission signals it guidelines. compared to the preguidelines era. While
is considering applying to all drug offenses.
In July 2005 the committee called the mandatory minimum penalties had some
guidelines too complex and overly rigid direct and indirect effects on those
and said they rely too much on relevant trends…the sentencing guidelines them-
And the prison
conduct and place too much emphasis on selves made a substantial and independent
quantifiable factors like drug quantity and contribution.” U.S. Sentencing Commis-
loss, and too little on role in the offense. sion, Fifteen Years of Guideline Sentencing,
The sentencing commission acknowl- Such criticisms of course pre-date at vi (Nov. 2004).
edged that increased guideline sen- Booker. For example, Justice Anthony The Booker decision focused new at-
tences have on lengthening prison terms Kennedy decried the long sentences re- tention on other serious problems with
in its 15-year study. quired by the federal sentencing guidelines the way guideline sentences are increased,
Already federal offenders who were when he called for their reduction in a including the use of relevant conduct, es-
sentenced in 2002 could expect to spend speech to the American Bar Association pecially the abhorrent practice of count-
almost twice as long in prison than those several years ago. ing acquitted conduct and the crimes of
sentenced in 1984. The Supreme Court Booker decision others and the crack cocaine guideline
provided the commission with the opening that, according to the commission is the
The federal prison system was 40
it needs to make meaningful adjustments single most important factor contributing
percent overcapacity in 2004.
to some of the worst guideline features. Not to racial disparity in federal sentencing.
In 2004 the federal prison population least among them is what Professor Frank Sadly, the commission has missed an im-
increased by 7,269, for a total of Bowman calls the “upward ratchet,” de- portant opportunity to use its expertise
180,328, making it the largest single scribing the commission’s predilection to and data to promote genuine, if incre-
jailer in the U.S. increase sentences whenever it considers a mental, change.
6 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
Proposed bill Booker revisited
(continued from page 1)
What is reasonable?
prison phone One of the big issues facing courts at
costs sentencing is how much consideration to
give to the guideline sentence. In Booker,
the Supreme Court instructed the courts
R ep. Bobby Rush“Family Telephone
H.R. 4466, the of appeals to evaluate sentences for “rea-
Connection Protection Act of 2005” to sonableness.” But the court did not de-
lower the excessive interstate phone rates fine a reasonable sentence. Increasingly,
charged to family members and incarcer- the courts of appeals have decided that a
ated persons. Introduced in December, the sentence within the guideline range is
bill was referred to the House Subcom- probably reasonable. There are
mittee on Telecommunications and the many problems with this approach.
Internet. There are no cosponsors. First, it ignores the sentencing statute
Rep. Rush points out that prison and its mandate that the court “shall im-
phone rates are some of the highest in pose a sentence that is sufficient, but
the United States — as high as $1 per not greater than necessary” to meet
minute and $3.95 per call for service
connection. Contributing to the problem
is the lack of competition between long
the goals of sentencing.
Second, if the courts act like the
guideline sentence is the reasonable
“ Booker has brought us rules moderated by mercy.
Judges are now better able to consider the offense,
the offender, and the needs of crime victims in
determining appropriate sentences .…So, let’s
distance carriers. Typically, a facility only sentence, they threaten to turn the celebrate. The system that Booker created is, by
allows one company to provide service. now-advisory guidelines into some every reasonable measure, superior to its prede-
In exchange for the monopoly, the car- sort of post-Booker version of
cessor and is working well. Happy anniversary to
rier pays the facility a commission, mandatory guidelines.
which may go to pay for other services
for the prison population.
Recognizing that high rates affect many
Not all judges, of course, blindly
apply guideline sentences. Many fol-
Booker, and here’s to many more.
— Lynn Adelman, U.S. District judge, Wisconsin
low the Supreme Court’s direction in
low-income families, H.R. 4466 would (See ”Crack sentences face new scrutiny in
Booker to calculate and consider the sen-
break the monopolies at each facility by di- federal courts,” page 14.) It remains to be
tencing guideline sentence, but also inde-
recting the Federal Communications Com- seen how the courts of appeals will handle
pendently evaluate the appropriate sentence
mission to set fair rates and policies to gov- such sentences in light of the increasing
based on the factors laid out in the sentenc-
ern telephone charges at state and federal “reasonableness” trend.
ing statute. Many judges have written
prisons. thoughtful, reasoned and thorough opin- In the meantime, the upcoming U. S.
These directives would include setting a ions explaining why they sentenced a defen- Sentencing Commission report on a year
maximum rate per minute and a maximum dant to a sentence lower than the guideline of sentencing since Booker should shed
rate for service connection and requiring sentence. So, while judges in the majority of light on sentencing and appellate practices.
service providers to offer the cheaper col- cases scrupulously adhere to the guidelines, The report should provide critical infor-
lect calling and debit account services. Al- they are examining sentences long consid- mation and analysis to help understand
though the federal system has debit account ered unfair, such as those for crack cocaine. the true state of sentencing.
services, many states do not. In addition,
the bill would prohibit service providers
from paying commissions to prisons ad- Resources
ministrators, add more interstate service To get the most up-to-date numbers on federal sentencing visit:
providers, and prohibit them from refusing www.ussc.gov and visit the Booker tab to see monthly reports on sentencing statistics
to place a call because the intended receiver since Booker.
is served by a rival company. To get daily, sometimes hourly, information on decisions, reports, media accounts and in fact
As a New York Times editorial recently everything Booker, visit http://sentencing.typepad.com to read professor Doug
Berman’s Sentencing Law and Policy Blog.
(continued on page 8)
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 7
Congress lifts ban on aid to some (continued from page 7)
students with drug convictions opined, H.R. 4466 would not only help
family members, it would help society in
S omebe eligiblewithfederalconvictions
According to the Department of Educa-
tion, 43,000 students lost their financial aid
general. By fostering meaningful commu-
nication between incarcerated persons and
loans or work-study assistance because due to the HEA restrictions in the academic
their loved ones, the chances of an incar-
Congress lifted a 1998 ban on financial aid year of 2001-2002, and an estimated
cerated person’s successful reentry into so-
for students with prior drug convictions. 173,000 students were ineligible for aid
ciety improve. But the bill faces tough op-
As part of a budget resolution passed in since the policy took effect in 1998.
position from the telecommunications
February, Congress amended a punitive The new provision, while much improved, industry and state prisons that, according
provision of the Higher Education Act still bans financial aid to students if the drug to the New York Times, “have grown ac-
sponsored by Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) offense occurred while they were receiving the customed to gouging the poorest families
that made students ineligible for aid if they aid. As before, the length of the ban is based in the country to subsidize some prison-
had convictions for drug possession or dis- on the gravity of the underlying offense and related activities … the current arrange-
tribution while in school and at any time the number of convictions. The new bill also ment is both counterproductive and
prior to entering school. Multiple convic- continues the policy of permitting students to morally indefensible.”
tions could have meant a lifetime ban on regain eligibility by completing drug rehabili-
student financial aid, regardless of whether tation and fulfilling other requirements. For further information, contact
the student was applying to college many C.U.R.E. at (202) 789-2126 or cure@
The President is expected to sign the bill curenational.org.
years after the offenses. The bill barred aid into law.
to students who incurred drug convictions.
Julie Stewart receives
Citizen Activist Award
Julie Stewart, FAMM’s founder and brother was convicted of growing mari-
president will receive the Citizen Activist juana and given a five-year mandatory
Award, an award given in alternate years minimum sentence in federal prison. She A U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in
Denver upheld the draconian 55-
by the Los Angeles-based Gleitsman Foun- quit her full-time job to start FAMM, a year mandatory sentence given to Weldon
dation to two individuals who have chal- nonprofit dedicated to fighting for just sen- Angelos, whose case FAMM had spot-
tencing policies. With little more than a
lenged social injustice in the United States. lighted in the Winter 2004 FAMMGram
The award will be presented in April at passion for justice and a belief it could be (page 10).
the Harvard Center for Public Leadership. achieved, Julie built an organization that
has led the way for sentencing reforms at The court rejected the argument that
Each awardee receives a gift of $50,000
Angelos’ sentence was cruel and unusual
and a commemorative sculpture designed the state and federal levels, resulting in
fairer sentence for tens of thousands of in- punishment and disproportionate to his
by Maya Lin, the creator of the Vietnam
dividuals. At the same time, FAMM spot- crime. He was convicted in 2004 of pos-
War Memorial in Washington, D.C.
lights the harshness of mandatory mini- session of a gun during three marijuana
The Gleitsman Foundation established sales worth several hundred dollars to an
mum sentencing policies and provides a
the award in 1989 to encourage individ- informant.
much-needed ray of hope to the thousands
ual commitment and leadership by recog-
of people behind bars in the United States. U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell
nizing the exceptional achievement of
The other 2006 Citizen Activist protested the sentence he was forced to
people who have initiated social change.
awardee is Mary Houghton of Shorebank, give Angelos, calling the sentence “unjust
It honors individuals who are leaders in
and cruel and even irrational.” He called
efforts to change the way we live through a banking institution that works to build
wealth for all in economically integrated the case the most difficult since he took
their courage and persistence.
communities, promote environmental the bench in 2002.
Julie founded FAMM in 1991 after her
health and operate profitably.
8 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
Is justice being served?
The following state and federal cases represent the “Faces of FAMM.” As you read, ask yourself if justice
is being served by the sentences they received. If you or someone you know is in a similar situation,
please use the case summary form found on page 21 of this issue.
Alva Mae Groves Angelita Able
Jurisdiction: Federal Jurisdiction: Michigan
Offense: Conspiracy to possess with intent Offense: Conspiracy to deliver cocaine
to distribute cocaine base; use of a firearm and delivery of cocaine, 225-649 grams
during and in relation to a drug-trafficking Priors: None
crime; trading food stamps for crack cocaine Date of sentencing: 1997
Priors: Possession of alcoholic Date of birth: 1973
beverages in 1979; larceny in 1994 for Authorities became suspicious of An-
stealing $8 worth of groceries gelita when a suspected drug dealer was
Date of sentencing: 1995 seen visiting the apartment she shared
Date of birth: 1921 with her boyfriend on numerous occasions. On the day of her
In 1994, authorities arrested 16 individuals believed to be in- arrest, officers claim to have observed her handling a bag con-
volved in a large-scale crack cocaine ring based in rural North taining cocaine that the drug dealer later sold to an undercover
Carolina. Alva Mae’s son was suspected of heading the drug ring officer. Although Angelita’s fingerprints were not on the bag, they
and four additional family members were allegedly involved. Au- alleged it was the same bag seen in Angelita’s possession. On a
thorities claimed that the drugs, which were typically exchanged subsequent search of Angelita and her boyfriend’s home, an ad-
for food stamps as payment, were housed and distributed from ditional 433 grams of cocaine were discovered. Angelita and her
the mobile home Alva Mae shared with her son. While Alva Mae boyfriend were charged with conspiracy to deliver cocaine be-
claims that she was not even aware that drug deals were being cause officers had purchased drugs from the drug dealer on nu-
conducted in her home, coconspirators and informants told in- merous occasions.
vestigators that she had sold small quantities of cocaine base for Angelita was born and raised in Detroit by her great-grand-
her son on numerous occasions and had even been known to re- mother. She dropped out of high school in the 10th grade when
cruit street dealers. she became pregnant with the first of her three children by her
Alva Mae was held accountable for all the drugs and illegal boyfriend, but later obtained her GED. She then attended Career
food stamps allegedly exchanged in the conspiracy: 1,887 grams of Works, the Professional Careers Institute and cosmetology school
crack cocaine and $15,930 in food stamps. She also received a in Detroit. Angelita was 23 years old and her daughters eight, five
firearms charge because a gun was discovered in a bedroom of her and one-and-a-half when she was sentenced. While her incarcer-
home. Alva Mae believes that she was prosecuted because she ation has been difficult on the family, all three children have
would not provide authorities with information that would impli- worked hard to adjust to it and continue to excel in school. Since
cate her family members. Alva Mae’s son is serving a life sentence. her incarceration, Angelita has participated in numerous sub-
Alva Mae has an eighth grade education and spent most of her stance abuse and educational courses and received training to be-
working career as an in-home care provider. After retiring in the come both a paralegal and a dental technician.
late 1980s, she lived on Social Security and rental income. When
arrested, Alva Mae was 72 years old and the primary caregiver for What do you think Angelita’s sentence should have been?
her two young grandchildren. She had such limited resources
and assets that she sold eggs, candy and soda to neighbors to sup- With no priors, ANGELITA ABLE received two consecutive
plement her income and support her grandchildren. sentences of 10-30 years each for a total of 20 to 60 years. She was
initially subject to two consecutive 20-30 year sentences, but the
judge used his ability to depart from the mandatory sentence for
What do you think Alva Mae’s sentence should have been? substantial and compelling reasons and reduced the sentences to
Because of her firearm and food stamp charges, ALVA MAE 10-30 years. As a result of this departure, Angelita was not eligible
GROVES received a total sentence of 295 months, or nearly 25 years. to benefit from Michigan’s 2003 sentencing reforms, which would
have made her eligible for parole after 10 years on each count.
Now she must wait until 2017 to become eligible for parole.
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 9
McConico introduces reform package in Michigan
Rep. Bill McConico (D-Detroit) intro- paroled under the 2003 sentencing reforms (D-Detroit), Rep. Steve Tobocman (D-De-
duced his long-awaited sentencing reform will join family members to ask that those troit), Rep. Gabe Leland (D-Detroit), and
package, H.B. 5654, H.B. 5655, and H.B. 5656. reforms be extended to include those still Duane Johnson, legislative assistant to Rep.
The bills provide earlier parole eligibility serving harsh sentences imposed under the Mary Waters (D-Wayne County), explained
for those sentenced under the pre-March 1, pre-reform drug laws. the legislative process and pledged their sup-
2003, mandatory minimum drug laws. They Laura Sager, national campaign director, port for the reforms. The lawmakers were
were referred to the House Judiciary Com- and Noah Smith, a political consultant, are clearly moved by the stories of the families
mittee, chaired by Rep. William Van Regen- continuing to meet with legislators from and formerly incarcerated individuals.
morter (R-Georgetown Township). FAMM both parties and key organizations to build Laura and attorney Margaret Raben ex-
will send Legislative Alerts to Michigan support for the reforms. plained the bills and answered questions
members when hearings are scheduled. about the impact of the proposals on individ-
ual members. Michigan FAMM is grateful to
As we go to press, members are prepar- State lawmakers meet
ing for a FAMM Day at the State Capitol the Rev. Wendall Anthony for the use of the
with FAMM members new Fellowship Church and his on-going
on Valentine’s Day to ask their representa-
On December 3, more than 60 members support.
tives to support the package of bills and
from across the state met in Detroit to dis-
sign on as cosponsors. Rep. McConico is Members with questions or concerns may
cuss the proposed bills. Rep. Bill McConico
the featured guest speaker. Individuals contact the Michigan FAMM office by calling
at (517) 487-1261, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. weekdays
or emailing firstname.lastname@example.org
Ted Wallace championed Michigan drug law reform
The lead sponsor of the first FAMM-initiated bill to repeal all of Michigan’s harsh
mandatory minimum drug laws died January 19 of a heart attack. Ted Wallace, De-
troit’s 36th District judge and a former state representative, was 64.
In 1998, Judge Wallace chaired the House Judiciary Committee. The reforms he sought
and FAMM continued to champion were finally achieved in 2003. He also actively sup-
ported the successful 1998 effort to win parole eligibility for individuals serving life with-
out parole for offenses involving delivery of more than 650 grams of heroin or cocaine.
“Judge Wallace understood the injustice of Michigan’s harsh mandatory mini-
mum drug laws and provided guidance, support and leadership in the campaign for Michigan Rep. Steve Tobocman (D-Wayne
County) with FAMM member Maribel Santana.
reform. His commitment to justice was an inspiration,” said Laura Sager, FAMM na-
tional campaign director. “His door was always open to FAMM members.”
FAMM supports efforts
Judge Wallace served as president of the Michigan Legislative Black Caucus and
for parolable lifers
was an active member of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators. He was also
a member of the Wolverine Bar Association, the Association of Black Judges in Michigan FAMM is also supporting
Michigan, the Metropolitan Bar Association, the Michigan Trial Association of the efforts by the Citizens Alliance on Prisons
NAACP, the Urban League and the Trade Union Leadership Council. and Public Spending (CAPPS) to increase
the number of paroles granted to individu-
Dooley Horton, 58, of Marion, Iowa, died in December from the long-term als serving parolable life sentences.
damage of Agent Orange in Vietnam. A mechanical and electrical engineer, he Members will be notified when and if
served seven years on a methamphetamine charge. FAMM extends its sympathy to CAPPS-supported legislation is introduced
his parents, Donald and Betty Whorton, and sons Brian and Jonathan. affecting those serving parolable life. There
FAMM member Brian Burke died late last year. FAMM sends its condolences to were approximately 1,500 individuals serv-
Brian’s family, including his mother, FAMM member Mary Burke. ing parolable life sentences in 2003. Of
these, about 169 are serving for “650” drug
10 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
offenses. FAMM members can obtain addi- N.C. FAMM continues
tional information on the CAPPS website, community outreach
www.capps-mi.org, or by calling (517)
482-7753. At press time, N.C. FAMM is sched-
uled to discuss cost-effective sentencing
reforms with business and school lead-
ers at a coalition meeting hosted by the
Public School Forum February 27. Pre-
NORTH CAROLINA senters will include LaFonda Jones-Gen-
eral, N.C. FAMM project director; Tom
FAMM panelist calls attention to
Ross, former chair of the N.C. Sentenc-
Carolina’s harsh sentencing laws ing Commission; and David Mills, execu-
Testifying at the Massachusetts hearing were
(l to r) Sean Glynn, whose brother, Patrick, is
Remarks by Burley Mitchell, a former tive director, Commonsense Foundation. serving a five-year mandatory sentence; Ber-
North Carolina Supreme Court justice and N.C. FAMM is also working with other nice Williams, whose daughter, Bonnie Ditoro,
is serving a 15-year mandatory sentence; and
district attorney, at a FAMM-sponsored groups to urge legislators to revise pro-
Lynn Holbein, FAMM spokesperson and chair
forum drew widespread attention to the posed gang legislation (H. 50) and is plan- of the SMART on Crime Coalition.
problem of North Carolina’s harsh sen- ning events to highlight more effective ap-
tencing laws for drug offenders and proaches to gang problems with national go to the House and Senate floors before
sparked a serious debate about reform in and local experts. the legislature recesses in July. FAMM
the North Carolina media. Asheville residents are slated to attend a members and coalition members will be
FAMM community workshop in February, notified when a day at the State House is
The Charlotte Observer responded with
in the first of several planned membership scheduled for visits to individual legislators.
an editorial, saying “there is a rational solu-
outreach events. Besides FAMM, other groups in the
tion to the state prison bed space crisis;
however, it will require the General Assem- North Carolina residents interested in coalition supporting S. 929 are the Massa-
bly to take into consideration the recom- becoming involved in FAMM activities chusetts League of Women Voters, National
mendations of the N.C. Sentencing and Pol- should contact LaFonda Jones-General, at Association of Social Workers, the Crimi-
icy Advisory Commission. The Sentencing (919) 530-8077 or email@example.com. nal Justice Policy Coalition, the Drug Pol-
and Policy Advisory Commission was icy Forum of Massachusetts, Partakers
charged with the duty to monitor crowding (“College Behind Bars”), the Massachusetts
and to recommend adjustments that will Organization for Addiction Recovery
help to reserve costly prison bed space for
MASSACHUSETTS (MOAR), and the Massachusetts Correc-
the most violent offenders. Unless legislators tional Legal Services.
100 FAMM members attend
give more attention to recommendations for For more information, contact Marie
trimming certain sentences, taxpayers
hearing on parole eligibility
Russo, FAMM’s Massachusetts ambassador,
should brace themselves for more prison- More than 200 people packed the Senate at (781) 334-5947 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
building and more state debt to erect pris- Judiciary Committee hearings in Novem-
ons and more taxes to operate them.” ber at the Massachusetts State House. Over
half were FAMM members, and most of
N.C. FAMM and N.C. Policy Watch
sponsored the November forum on sen-
the rest were members of the Smart on KANSAS
Crime Coalition. The coalition, which in-
tencing issues in Raleigh. Other panelists
included Marc Mauer, executive director of
cludes FAMM, is making its top priority S. Retroactive treatment bill
929, a bill that provides parole eligibility advances in Kansas
The Sentencing Project, and Daniel Blue,
for drug offenders after they serve two-
former N.C. Speaker of the House. Three years ago, Kansas legislators did the
thirds of their sentences.
Mauer explored the relationship between right thing and passed a bill (S.B. 123) that
Witnesses spoke eloquently about the allows certain drug defendants to be sen-
incarceration and crime, the factors that re-
need to reform mandatory minimums. A tenced to a 12-18 month treatment program,
duce crime and the effects that incarceration
wide range of experts and many family instead of prison. Results from S.B. 123 have
has had upon the African American com-
members repeated the same theme during been outstanding, with a recidivism rate of
munity. He noted that “increasing incarcera-
the six-hour hearing. less than 10 percent for those individuals
tion while ignoring more effective ap-
proaches will impose a heavy burden upon The next step is to urge the 17 mem- completing the treatment program.
courts, corrections and communities, while bers of the judiciary committee to report Unfortunately, S.B. 123 was not made
providing a marginal impact on crime.” the bill favorably out of committee so it can
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 11
retroactive, which would have affected On January 27, Kansas FAMM sponsored
about 1,000 prisoners. Since then Peter a legislative task force meeting in which
Communicating Ninemire, FAMM’s Midwest organizer, has nearly 70 FAMM members and supporters
worked hard to win bi-partisan support for pledged to work toward H.B. 2231’s passage.
with FAMM a bill offering retroactivity to the 500 peo- Five legislators discussed the steps in the leg-
ple still incarcerated for drug use offenses islative process and explained their views of
As FAMM grows, so does the vol-
that occurred before the passage of SB 123 the obstacles and strategies for success in
ume of mail, phone calls and emails
in July 2003. passing the bill. Also in January, Peter pre-
we receive each day.
sented the case for sentencing reform to a re-
Here’s how to com- His persistence is paying off. In January
ceptive audience at the Sedgwick County
municate effectively 2005, Rep. Bill McCreary (R-Wellington)
with FAMM. introduced H.B. 2231, a bill to “modify cer-
Peter found more support for the bill
Donations and when he and former prisoner Paul Gose-
memberships. All land were guests on a call-in weekly radio
donations and talk show with Bonita Gooch, editor of the
memberships should be sent to Community Voice. Goseland was recently
FAMM headquarters in Washington, released from a life sentence for his third
D.C. A basic membership is $25 and possession of $20 worth of cocaine due to
$10 for prisoners. Credit card dona- his drug addiction.
tions can be made at www.famm.org. Peter needs all Kansans to get involved
Donations to FAMM Foundation are in making retroactivity a reality. Please con-
tax-deductible. We also gladly accept Peter Ninemire, FAMM’s Midwest coordinator, tact him at (316) 651-5852 or
postage stamps. with Kansas representatives Nile Dilmore (D- email@example.com for information on
92) and McCreary (R-80). getting involved.
Writing, calling and e-mailing
FAMM. Business correspondence, case tain drug offense sentences…” In 2005 the
summaries and stories, memberships bill was voted out of the House of Repre-
and general information inquiries sentatives and sent to the Senate for consid-
should be sent to FAMM’s office in eration, where its first hearing was Febru-
Washington, D.C. Andrea Strong, ary 16, 2006. MARYLAND
member services director, answers
Although it is an uphill battle, the bill has Joining forces for justice
emails sent to famm@ famm.org.
strong bipartisan support and is getting a lot
FAMM’s coordinators run FAMM is a member of Justice Maryland,
of attention. Last November, Peter convened
FAMM chapters and an- a bipartisan legislator/public forum at the a statewide organization of individuals and
swer your letters and Wichita Independent Business Association to organizations united to identify and reform
calls on a limited, volun- build support for the bill. FAMM members the parts of Maryland’s justice systems that
teer basis. FAMM’s office and supporters participated in a lively discus- contribute to poverty and racial injustice.
and chapters do not ac- sion on sentencing policy reform with com- Its Campaign for Treatment Not Incar-
cept collect calls. munity members and eight legislators – four ceration is promoting return of judicial dis-
Democrats and four Republicans – in atten- cretion to judges sentencing nonviolent of-
Legal cases. We cannot
dance. The Wichita Eagle Beacon followed- fenders and asking for an additional $30
offer you legal representation
up on the forum with an editorial endorsing million to fund more treatment options. In
or advice. Please do not send us
H.B. 2231, in large part due to the success of addition, FAMM also works with the coali-
your legal work unless
S.B.123. tion to oppose legislative measures that im-
we request it.
pose draconian mandatory minimums.
On January 4, Peter discussed the bill
Case profiles. FAMM collects in- FAMM members will receive action e-alerts
with more than 20 South Central Kansas
formation on people serving manda- as the legislative process warrants.
legislators at a Sedgwick County public
tory minimum sentences for public forum on key issues for the 2006 legislative Justice Maryland also has a program
education purposes. See the case session. The NBC affiliate covered the event that is seeking to restore voting rights for
summary form on pages 21–22. and interviewed Peter as part of a favorable the formerly incarcerated.
story on the legislation that aired on their
12 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
FAMM asks Supreme Court to review good-time issue
or years FAMM, has been at the which the prisoner was sentenced. Because The mistake lengthens the sentences of over
F forefront of litigation efforts to the accumulating credit shortens the 150,000 prisoners in BOP custody. It is based
change the way the Federal Bureau of Pris- amount of time a prisoner has to serve, the on the courts of appeals’ flawed interpreta-
ons (BOP) calculates good-conduct credit. method results in fewer actual days cred- tion of Supreme Court cases that tell the
Now we are asking the U. S. Supreme ited. In fact, for every year of every pris- courts how and when to defer to agency de-
Court to resolve the issue. oner’s sentence, the BOP shortens the cisions. Furthermore, the courts that have
credit by seven full days. This means that a ruled on the question arrived at their deci-
In two of three cases awaiting Supreme
prisoner who has not “lost” good time sions using a variety of reasons that form a
Court review FAMM has joined the National
through bad conduct receives only 47 days sort of split among the circuits on a very im-
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
for every sentence year, instead of the 54 portant issue of statutory interpretation.
(NACDL) and the National Association of
days provided by law.
Federal Defenders (NAFD) in friends of the Visit www.famm.org for a copy of the
court, or amicus briefs. O’Donald v. Payne, The Supreme Court grants reviews to briefs and to learn if the Court will grant
No. 05-8504 and Mujahid v. Daniels, No. very few of the hundreds of petitions filed review. If it does, then the petitioner and
05-8678. All 73 federal public defenders every year. Often, the court will grant in a the government will file briefs “on the mer-
have also signed on to the amicus brief in case where the circuit courts of appeals are its” of their positions and FAMM and fel-
Mujahid. divided, but such is not the case here. (See low amici will join with our perspective.
“Earlier decisions,” on this page.)
At issue is how the BOP calculates FAMM thanks David Lewis of the ap-
good-time credit, which by statute is set at In the absence of a circuit split, FAMM pellate division, New York Federal Public
54 days per year. But the BOP bases its cal- argues to the Supreme Court that the issue Defenders, and Erwin Chemerinsky, Alston
culations on the amount of time a prisoner presents a question of great practical and and Bird Professor of Law, Duke Law
has served, not on the amount of time to legal significance for a number of reasons. School, for writing briefs on our behalf.
Earlier decisions ruled
against petitioners Congressional
Although FAMM worked several clear from the words of the statute. The directory
years with excellent private attorneys courts have then used a rule that it says di-
and federal public defenders to represent rects them to “defer” to the agency’s (in this Order the new directory for the
good-time petitioners in the lower case the BOP) interpretation of a statute if 109th Congress to learn about
courts, every circuit court considering ambiguity cannot be resolved. each member of Congress,
the issue ruled against petitioners. how to contact them, the com-
Anticipating this response, litigants mittees, and a host of important information. It’s
(The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals is further asserted that even if the statute is a great tool for the FAMM activist. $10.
currently reviewing a case and because unclear, the courts should not defer to
there are no federal prisons in the District the agency’s interpretation before using Send a $10 check to FAMM, 1612 K St., NW,
of Columbia, that circuit has no case.) what are called “traditional rules of Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20006 or go to
statutory construction” to clear up the famm.org and handle your transaction
Litigants argued that the statute that online. Click the “Donate” button, choose
ambiguity. One of those tools is the
grants good time, 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b), $10, and note “Congressional Directory”
“rule of lenity,” which directs courts to
clearly provides that the 54 days, if earned, in the memo box when placing your order.
resolve ambiguous punishment laws in
must be applied to reduce the sentence by
ways that favor the prisoner. The courts, Call FAMM (202) 822-6700 to place your
54 days. Nearly all the courts determined
however, largely ignored the rule of order.
that the statute granting federal good time
lenity in reaching their decisions, despite
is “ambiguous.” They have held that the
recent Supreme Court decisions affirm-
method of determining good time (though
not the maximum amount available) is un-
ing its use in related areas. Order it today!
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 13
Crack sentences face new scrutiny in federal courts
moved the language that made the guide-
S that gavelandmark Booker decision
federal judges increased
punishment, circumstances of the offense
and the likelihood of rehabilitation. For ex- line range mandatory but left the other fac-
sentencing discretion, some judges have ample, the court in Simon v. U.S., 361 tors. The report finds some courts are re-
imposed sentences in crack cocaine cases F.Supp.2d 35 (E.D. N.Y. 2005) reasoned examining the guideline range in light of
that fall well below the recommended that to give the guidelines more weight the goals of sentencing.
guideline sentence. would draw the court closer “to
In U.S. v. Perry, 389 F.Supp.2d
committing the act that Booker
A January report by the Sentencing Pro- 278 (D.R.I. 2005), U.S. District
forbids,” by instituting “a de
ject, “Sentencing with Discretion: Crack Judge William E. Smith – ap-
facto mandatory sentence.” The
Cocaine Sentencing After Booker,” analyzes pointed by President George W.
court held that Simon’s guide-
24 federal cases involving crack cocaine of- Bush – sentenced Perry to the
line range of 324-405 months
fenses in which the court issued sentences mandatory minimum of 120
was too severe and sentenced
below the recommended guideline range. months (10 years). Judge Smith
the defendant to 262 months
held that the 100:1 ratio between
The report found one of the main issues (21 years and 10 months).
powder and crack cocaine produced a
the courts are confronting is how much in-
A number of courts in the report con- guideline range (188 to 235 months) that
fluence the guidelines’ recommended sen-
cluded that the recommended guideline “cannot stand up to the scrutiny of analysis
tence should have. The Supreme Court’s
ranges produced sentences in individual under 18 U.S.C. § 3553,” and “is substan-
decision in Booker is silent on this issue; it
cases that would have been grossly dispro- tially greater than is necessary to reflect the
only instructs lower courts to “take account
portionate to the sentencing goals of in 18 seriousness of the offense, to promote re-
of the guidelines together with other sen-
U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A-D), that sentences spect for the law, and to provide adequate
be “sufficient but not greater than neces- general and specific deterrence.” Instead,
Many district courts have opted to sary.” Before Booker, courts had no choice the court would have chosen a sentence
weigh the guidelines equally with other but to apply the guideline range. Booker re- using a ratio of 20:1, but it was still forced
sentencing factors, such as the goals of to issue a mandatory minimum sentence of
10 years for the charge of distributing crack
cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school. The
Words of caution about this trend government has appealed this decision.
Not all sentencing experts feel these judicial departures are a positive trend. “This may actu- Also gaining new relevance is the §
ally end up being a flash point for the post-Booker problems,” warns law professor Frank Bow- 3553(a)(1) provision that the court con-
man, referring to the potential for a congressional backlash against judges exerting their new sider “the nature and circumstances of the
sentencing powers in this way. offense and the history and characteristics
This fear is warranted given how many bills have contained mandatory minimum sentences of the defendant …” FAMM and other
since Booker. Some members of Congress are using the now-advisory nature of the guidelines sentencing reform organizations have long
as an excuse to pack bills with harsh and wholly unnecessary mandatory minimums. Remem- decried the inability of the guideline
ber, Booker only gave judges discretion under the sentencing guidelines, not the mandatory scheme to adequately incorporate these
minimum laws which remain unchanged. Judges must still adhere to the five- and 10-year considerations.
penalties for five and 50 grams of crack cocaine. Only Congress can change the mandatory
In U.S. v. Nellum, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
1568 (N.D. Ind. 2005), the court consid-
Also, the sentences highlighted in the Sentencing Project’s report were based on the individ-
ered the defendant’s record as an Army vet-
ual circumstances of each case. Future defendants coming before the same courts should not
eran, his long period of drug-and crime-
assume they will receive a similar sentence below the recommended guideline range simply
free activity, his medical history, and his
because they were convicted of crack cocaine offenses. In addition, the courts of appeals may
history of addiction. The court also con-
weigh in on what could be seen as a practice of policymaking by the courts, by rejecting low-
templated the defendant’s age (57 years)
ered crack cocaine sentences and directing the lower courts to avoid them.
with respect to his likelihood to re-offend.
Already, the First Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed one such sentence in United States v.
“Under the guidelines, the age of the of-
Pho, 433 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2005), finding that the sentence was incorrect “as a matter of law.”
fender is not ordinarily relevant in deter-
But the 11th Circuit has affirmed another in U.S. v. Williams, No. 05-11594 (11th Cir. Jan. 13,
mining the sentence. But under §
2006), holding that the lower court “gave specific, valid reasons for sentencing lower than the
3553(a)(2)(c), age of the offender is plainly
advisory range” and deeming the 90-month sentence “reasonable.”
relevant to the issue of ‘protect[ing] the
14 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
public from further crimes of the defen- five-year guideline sentence (and mandatory and defendants convicted of possessing
dant.’” As a result, the court sentenced the minimum sentence) while 500 grams of crack cocaine.” Considering the commis-
defendant to 108 months (nine years) as powder triggers the same sentence. sion’s recommended 20:1 ratio along with
opposed to the recommended guideline other sentencing factors and a substantial
In U.S. v. Smith, 359 F.Supp.2d 771
range of 168-210 months. (Appeal was dis- assistance departure, Judge Adelman issued
(E.D. Wisc. 2005) U.S. District Judge Lynn
missed by motion of the U.S. attorney.) a term of 18 months, significantly lower
Adelman expansively scrutinized the his-
than the recommended guideline range of
Finally, the report concluded most judges tory and relevance of the 100:1 ratio, citing
121-151 months. (Appeal was dismissed on
considering crack guideline departures are commission testimony and studies, and
motion of the U.S. Attorney.)
relying on the sentencing commission’s pre- found the ratio lacked justification. He
vious calls for revising the 100:1 ratio be- concluded that “adherence to the guide- For a copy of the Sentencing Project’s
tween crack and powder cocaine. It takes lines would result in a sentence greater report, contact The Sentencing Project, 514
just 1/100th the amount of crack cocaine to than necessary and would also create un- 10th St. N.W., Suite 1000, Washington, DC
receive the same sentence as for powder co- warranted disparity between defendants 20004 (202) 628-0871, www.sentencing-
caine: a mere five grams of crack triggers a convicted of possessing powder cocaine project.org
New Jersey As Dea testified, “this misnamed elect John Corzine’s corrections policy
(continued from page 1) ‘school-zone law’ has little to do with transition team, which will recommend
schools or children…these laws do not policy priorities to the governor and his
legislators to re-introduce bills from last work, are too broadly drawn to target in- cabinet. In addition to urging reform of the
year to decrease the size of the protected dividuals engaging in drug offenses in- “drug-free school zone law,” Dea encour-
school zones, which would reduce some of volving children, and have uncon- aged the transition team to support the
the harshest impact of the laws. scionably disproportionate consequences sentencing commission and to advocate for
for citizens of color.” “smart-on-crime” initiatives.
Before the 2005 legislative session
ended, Dea DeWitt, N.J. project director, Dea and Angelyn Frazer, FAMM’s Dea also submitted testimony in support
and Laura Sager, national campaign di- national organizing director, continue to of bill S. 2517, which authorizes courts to
rector, testified in support of proposed build support for the bills and keep mem- refrain from imposing driver’s license sus-
school-zone legislation cosponsored by bers informed. Dea spoke in support of the pension on persons convicted of drug of-
Assembly members Mary Previte (D-6) reforms at a Drug Policy Alliance press con- fenses if compelling circumstances exist.
and Peter Barnes (D-18). The bill passed ference. The bill became law January 12.
out of committee before the end of ses- On January 3, Dea testified before Gov.-
sion, and was reintroduced in the Assem-
bly on January 31 as A.B. 2189. Sen.
Bernard Kenny (D-33) pre-filed the bill
in the Senate. Report recommends change to school-zone law
The bills contain the sentencing com- The N.J. Commission on Criminal Sentencing drew these conclusions about the school-zone law.
mission’s recommendations. They would The end result of the “urban effect” of drug-free zones in urban environments is that nearly
• Reduce all drug-free zones in size to every offender (96 percent) convicted and incarcerated for a drug-free zone offense is either
200 feet from the protected location (school Black or Hispanic.
zones are currently 1,000 feet and public The enormous, unbroken overlap of zones has diluted the special protection of schools the
zones are 500 feet); law was originally intended to create and protect.
• Remove any mandatory minimum pe- Reducing the zone size to 200 feet will make the zone law more effective and reduce the
riod of incarceration for the new zone of- number of people of color disproportionately affected.
fense; The costs of mass incarceration of drug offenders have become a financial burden for the
• Elevate the new zone offense to a sec- state, and “might not constitute the most efficient use of public funds to promote public
ond degree crime, which carries a maxi- safety…”
mum sentence of 10 years; and You’ll find a copy of the report at http://sentencing.nj.gov/publications.html.
• Remove some barriers to treatment for
nonviolent drug offenders.
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 15
M. Abercrombie, E. Abramczyk, R. Adames, M. Adams, D. Adamson, F. Adamson, M. Adam-
son, L. Adelman, C. Adkins, E. Agee, D. Aguiar, L. Ahrens, . AICAP, W. Aikens, B. Alexander, C.
Alexander, T. Alexander, D. Allen, E. Allen, P. Allen, American Carpet Cleaners, K. Amero, T.
Amigdalos, C & P. Anderson, L. Anderson, S. Anllo, J. Appelbaum, E. Arceneaux, L. Arcuri, D.
Arneson, M. Arnould, L. Ashton, ML. Atkinson, P. Attig, M. Bailey, S. Bala, J. Balazs, L. Barch-
eski, P. Barnes, B. Barnhill, H. Baskins-Spears, B. Bates, R. Batey, P. Baucum, G. Baumblatt,
S. Bear, D. Beard, J. Beck, R. Beck, P. Beckner, B. Beckwith, B. Bedell, JH. Beek, D. Behler,
M. Bell, M. Belniak, D. Beman, J & M. Benson, M. Benson, W. Bern, P. Biderman, L. Bigbee,
W. Biliani, A. Bishawi, D. Blake, N. Blakney, J. Blinkoff, B. Bloom, J. Blount, J. Bogan, S.
Bolen, J. Bolton, M. Bonner, B. Boss, D. Boswell, E. Boucher, I. Bowen, M. Bowers, J & M.
Bowes, B. Bowman, P. Bowsher, B. Boyd, D. Breck, R. Breeden, B. Brenton, H. Bretan, W.
Bridgers, P. Brisson, L. Broadwell, T. Bromm, J. Brooks, W. Brower, C. Brown, D. Brown, E.
hank you for your strong support of FAMM’s
Brown, K. Bryant, R. Buchheim, W. Buckman, A. Burchenal, J. Burke, T. Burkert, W. Burkert,
C. Burnstein, A & K. Bush, T. Bussert, B. Buster, P. Butler, D. Butts, A. Bynum, JM. Calia, D.
Callahan, M. Calvert, RL. Campbell, C. Cardin, J. Carlisle, SJ. Caroll, C. Carroll, BB. Carter,
G. Carter, L. Carter, R. Carter, B. Casas, M. Casseldine, G. Cecil, M. Chapman, J. Charnis,
T annual December fundraising drive. Your indi-
vidual contributions totaled more than $78,800,
dollars that were matched in full by three anonymous major
JG. Chase, A & H. Chaset, D. Cheek, K. Cherrington, WR. Cherubini, A. Christova, B. Clark, B donors. Your generosity is also matched by your diversity –
& C. Clark, C. Clark, D. Clark, C. Clements, B & J. Cloud, L. Coleman, D. Colister, M. Collette, FAMM counts families, service providers, community leaders,
C. Colon, C. Conlen, B. Conn, JC. Conniff, D. Cotney, B. Countryman, J. Courson, L. Courter, legal advocates and public officials among our donors.
B. Cowen, J. Cox, W. Cox, H & V. Craft, K. Craig, C. Crehore, J. Crew, F. Crisler, M. Crockett, FAMM is especially grateful to the 338 incarcerated men
H & L. Cromwell, C. Csernica-Haas, D. Cullinane, M. Curry, CH. Dabbs, J & J. Dalbec, G. and women who made a point of sending stamps and checks
David, R. Davis, S. Davis, J. Dean, N. Dean, H & T. DeFranco, D. Degroat, M. Deitch, B. Deitte,
in support of our work. We understand your sacrifice, and
V. DeMartins, M & R. Demers, C. Denko, S. Dennis, V. Depaulis, E. Dettinger, C. DeVore, S.
thank you so much for your commitment.
Dill, R. Dipietro, J. Divietri, N. Dixon, T. Dooley, The. Douglas Family, M. Drake, S. Draper, I.
Drum, D. DuBuis, M. Ducoing, L. Dudley, R. Dunklau, P. Durban, R. Dyches, W. Dyson, V.
With your contribution, FAMM fights mandatory mini-
Ealom, F. Eaman, C. Eaton, C. Eckhardt, S. Edeawo, A. Edelman, B. Edelman, A. Edin, B. Ed- mums and other harsh sentencing policies across the country
wards, D. Egenberger, S. Ehlers, D & S. Eichenberger, M. Elliott, B. Ellis, D. English, M. Er- with strategies that include grassroots organizing, policy
ickson, E. Esche, B. Evans, Z. Evans, A. Everhart, R. Fabry, P. Fahy, M. Fairbanks, E. Faison, advocacy, litigation and media.
M. Fallon, T. Fallon, J. Farah, K. Farino, A. Farrar, J. Farrington, L. Fassler, D. Faulkingham,
C. Fauntleroy, D. Fausett, R. Federico, E & G. Ferguson, B. Fernandez, SM. Ferranti, L. Fil-
lion, B. Fisher, R. Fitzpatrick, MK. Flanigan, W. Flatau, J. Fleming, B. Fletcher, S. Flinn, P. Flom,
R. Fluker, S. Fluker, G. Fontenot, A. Fortner, J. Fournier, K. Fourre, G. Franco, C. Franz, R. Free-
land, P. Friedburg, E. Friedman, R. Frogge, B. Fruth, J. Frydman, S. Fuentes, G. Fulk, H. Fur-
Federal and state advocacy
nish, J. Futch, P. Gaffney, A. Gainer, J. Galinsky, C. Galloway, P. Gambill, N & W. Garlinghouse, In hearings before the U.S. Sentencing Commission, FAMM
P. Garren, T. Gaston, P. Gawne, T. Geers, P. Gegenheimer, L. George, E. Gholston, E. Gibbs, J. urges long-term changes in the guidelines that embody the
Gilden, C. Giles, S. Giles, M. Gill, D. Gillett, C. Ginsberg, S. Giraldo, W. Gish, A. Gjesdahl, R. core principles of the federal sentencing statute, including that
Glaser, M. Gleckler, F. Glover, N. Goldberg, P. Goldberger, B & M. Golder, J. Goldman, A. Golub, punishment should be “sufficient, but not greater than neces-
J. Gongora, E. Gonzalez, R. Gonzalez, . Goodman-Davis, D. Gordon, P. Gordon, D. Gould, EJ. sary” to achieve the goals of sentencing.
Goulden, M. Gradicone, J. Graf, S. Graganta, J.C.. Graham, S. Graham, K. Graue, C. Graves, FAMM mobilizes opposition to a harsh new drug sentenc-
E. Gray, L. Grazer, D. Green, J. Green, O. Green, G. Greenfield, L. Greenhouse, W. Greer, R.
ing bill sought to add new mandatory minimum penalties and
Grimmett, JW. Grip, D. Grosse, D. Guerrero, J. Gullett, C. Guyton, J. Gwinn, S. Hacker, A. Had-
radically alter the federal sentencing guidelines. The bill is
den, THP. Hahn, C. Hairston, M. Haloostock, W. Hamhardt, P. Hammon, M. Hampton, R. Ham-
stead, M. Hansen, T. Hardwick, T. Harmon, A. Harr, P. Harrington, V. Harrington, S. Hartz, J &
G. Haselow, H. Hawkins, R. Haworth, J. Hayden, D. Hayes, S. Haynes, E. Hazelwood, L. Hen- Some 120 FAMM members attend the first 2005 FAMM
ley, G. Hennessey, J. Henrigillis, M. Herman, O. Hernandez, B. Herron, D. Herron, T. Heskett, Day at the Michigan Capitol to urge their lawmakers to “finish
D. Hess, B. Hewitt, A & P. Heymann, C. Hill, D. Hill, L. Hill, B. Hinson, MJ. Hock, J. Hodges, the mandatory minimum drug law reforms of 2002.” State rep-
M. Hodges, S. Hoffman, T. Hoggard, L. Holbein, F. Holguin, L. Hollingsworth, J. Holmes, D & resentative Bill McConico offers a set of bills that incorporate
H. Holveg, D. Hon, A. Hopkins, S. Hopwood , K. Horvat, J. Hoschild, RJ. Hoslett, D. Hostetter, these recommendations.
A. Howard, D. Howard, L. Howard, V. Howard, L. Howell, P. Huckleberry, M. Huerta, A. Hug- FAMM testifies before the Kansas Sentencing Commission in
gins, E. Hughes, D. Humber, D. Husband, T. Hutchison, R & T. Iammarino, T. Imhof, R. Ingle, favor of drug treatment alternatives to sentences for chemically
A. Ippolitto, R. Jackaway, M. Jackson, E. Jackson , A. Jackson-Clervoix, L. Jacobsen, J. addicted individuals.
Jaffe, P. Jara, T. Jaramillo, L. Jarbo, B. Jarges, L. Jarrett, S. Jean-Pierre, C. Jefferson-Bey,
Nearly 50 FAMM members from across the state meet with
F. Jeffery, GV. Jeffries, S & S. Jenks, D. Jewell, A. Johnson, B. Johnson, C. Johnson, E. John-
their representatives at the third annual North Carolina
son, G. Johnson, H. Johnson, JD. Johnson, K. Johnson, N. Johnson, R. Johnson, T. Johnson,
W. Johnson, R. Johnston, R & N. Jolly, C. Jones, C & R. Jones, M. Jones, S. Jones, J. Jor-
FAMM Legislative Day at the state capitol in Raleigh.
dan, D. Joseph, P. Kamlesh, W. Kaplan, M. Kapplehoff, C. Karafa, J. Kast, J. Kater, S. Katsi-
nas, L. Kavitz, R. Keller, S. Kelley, L. Kelly, M. Kelly, D. Kemper, R. Kenan, A. Kershner, J. Kidd,
L. King, D. Kinkela, L & L. Klinkel, V. Koch, C. Koller, M. Kottke, A. Kraut, K. Krehbiel, C.
Krushall, V. Kumar, P. Lackey, L. Lane, C. Lang, J. Langton, D. Lanier, R. Lantz, A. Larimore,
K. Larson, S. Latham, R. Latoria, D. Lawton, J. Laytart, L. Layton, S. Leah, LA. Leen, T. Le-
gendre, J. LeGrand, D. Letschka, B. Levine, R. Levine, G. Lewis, M. Lewis, S. Lewis, B. Li-
16 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
bretti, J. Libretti, K. Lightfoot, M. Limon, J. Little, L. Little, D. Little , J & R. Littlefield, D.
Lochner, J. Logan, P. Loge, E. Lotke, J. Love, J. Lovejoy, DR. Lucey, M. Lukoc, G. Lyles, K.
Lyles, P & R. Lyons, R. Macdonald, M. Mace, A. Mack, C. Mackey, B. Madden, A. Madonia, K.
Majewski, S. Makelke, J. Malone, K. Maloney, R. Mann, P. Mannino, G. Manual, B. Man-
zanares, L. Marble, C. Marquez, M. Marquez, P. Marshall, L. Martin, P. Martin, C. Martinez, E.
your help! Martinez, F. Martinez, M. Martinson, K. Mashburn, D. Mathis, E. Mathison, C. Mau, R. Mayer,
S. Mayer, G. Mays, L. Mayzes, R. Mazur, S. McAfee, J. McAtee, K. McCalla, T. McClurge, J.
McDonald, N. McElligott, N. McElroy, C. McElwee, W. McGarry, K. McIver, J. McKee, R. McK-
own, C. McLaughlin, T. McPheeters, J. Meade, N. Medical, B. Meek, K. Meggers, J & S. Meier,
D. Mendoza, J. Mendoza, P. Micklin, B. Middleton, G. Milano, D. Miles, E. Millan, A. Miller, B.
Miller, J. Miller, Mrs. Miller, P. Miller, W. Milliken, J & J. Minor, L. Minto, K. Mishler, T. Mixen,
D & N. Mongelli, B. Moore, P. Morales, L. Morford, C. Mornan, J. Morrell, M. Morris, B. Mor-
Litigation and legal advocacy rison, L. Morrison, F. Morrocco, J. Morrow, F. Morton, R. Mosley, M. Muhammad, R. Mullen,
S. Murphy, R. Murrell, M. Mustafa, J. Nadelhoffer, E. Nadelmann, J. Nash, M. Nebon, L. Ne-
FAMM provides a briefing sheet on the Booker gron, E. Neufeld, R. Neuhausser, F. Neumark, A. Newson, P. Newton, A. Nichols, G. Ninemire,
decision explaining its impact on the sentencing guidelines K. Ninemire, R. Nixon, S. Nixon-Scales, T. Nock, M. Norris, L & R. Novak, L. Nussbaum, R. Ny-
and on prisoners’ sentences and outlining the potential for strom, D. Occhiuto, D. Odebunmi, K. O’Dowd, K. Oglesby, R. Olds, V. Oletski-Behrends, R.
continued reforms. Oliver, B. O’Malley, K. Orehowsky, W. O’Reilly, R. Orellanes, J. Oreye, B. Ortega, LA. Ortega,
FAMM supports litigation around the country to change the G. Ortiz, E. Osborne, J. Osborne, T. Osbourne, T. Owens, D. Padden, S. Palmer, E. Panico, P.
Panizzutti, D. Parham, D. Parker, C. Parkerson, T. Parkerson, R. Pastrana, R. Patterson, C.
way the federal bar calculates good-time credit.
Paukert, K. Payant, S. Pearlman, V. Pena, C. Pendleton, D. Peoples, C. Perez, A. Peri, L.
FAMM supports cases in the federal courts of appeal chal-
Perkins, T. Perrett, K. Perrow, R. Persson, B. Peters, A. Peterson, R. Peterson, K. Peterson-
lenging the Bureau of Prisons on limits to halfway house stays.
Knox, M. Piccarreta, E. Pierson, G. Piner, D. Polan, A. Politi, B. Polley, R. Pomranz, F. Pope, G.
Porter, L. Porter, S. Porter, C. Potter, J. Potter, E. Powers, E. Preate Jr., S. Preston, CJ. Price,
T. Price, H. Prince, R. Proctor, T. Proctor, M. Proud, N. Purk, N. Quevedo-Roque, L & W.
Education and communication Quigley, E. Quinones, M. Raben, A. Rademaker, J. Rahn, R. Raleigh, E. Ramirez, J. Ramos, L
& R. Randolph, K. Randolph-Back, E. Rantzman, B. Rashid, J & M. Rashid, E. Raymond, M.
FAMM organizes a teleconference of sentencing experts to Raymond, W. Redpath, C. Reed, T. Reed, L. Reeves, C. Regan, J & L. Reicher, M. Reisig, S.
respond to the Booker and Fanfan Supreme Court decisions. Relerford, J. Rettenberger, D. Reynolds, J. Riccardi, C. Rice, A. Richardson, B. Richardson, T.
The event draws more than 60 journalists and influences Richardson, C. Rillman, M. Riske, W. Roach, H. Roark, B. Roberson, D. Roberts, R. Robertson,
coverage in outlets that include the New York Times, the Wall C. Robinson, G. Robinson, L. Robinson, N. Robinson, T. Robinson, JE. Robinson III, A. Robin-
Street Journal, National Public Radio, and the News Hour son-Dawkins, M. Rodriguez, A. Roebuck, R. Romero, E. Rose, D. Rosenbloom, K. Ross, D. Ro-
with Jim Lehrer. toto, B. Rowland, E. Royce, H. Ruder, E. Rugiero, E. Rumsay, L. Runyan, R. Runyan, R. Rus-
sel, R. Rutkowski, H. Ryan, G. Ryan-Kentros, S. Sady, L. Sager, P. Sager, P & S. Sager, S.
At a packed press conference in Trenton, FAMM releases
Salky, C. Sanchez, R. Santos, F. Sargent, D. Sarraulte, C. Savoy, A & B. Sax, S. Schaechter, D
findings of a new poll showing that New Jersey residents
& M. Schlitt, K. Schmeichel, H. Schmidt, R. Schneider, M. Schreter, A. Schultz, R. Scotkin, C.
strongly support sentencing reforms. Articles appear in the
Scott, J. Scott, P. Scott, A. Segrest, B. Selin, C. Sellors, R. Semler, J. Sewell, A. Shabazz, E.
Newark Star-Ledger, the Trenton Times and the Trentonian. Sharpley, J. Shaw, The. Shaw Family, A. Sheldon, S. Sheldon, A. Shelton, T. Sherlock, K. Sher-
FAMM‘s “Facts on Methamphetamines” responds to new, ill- rill, J. Shew, K. Shinners, R. Siaca, P. Sikes, H. Sikkema, S. Silverman, C. Simmons, C.
considered mandatory sentencing laws based on a reported “epi- Simms, J. Simpson, P. Sims, R. Sinnott, D. Sissons, G. Sitto, L. Skover , W. Slater, J. Slaugh-
demic” of methamphetamine use and gang violence. ter, RD. Sleator, V. Sloan, A. Smith, J. Smith, R. Smith, S. Smith, G. Snyder, M. Soller, P.
The quarterly FAMMGram and FAMM’s website – Solorzano, W. Somers, GW. Somes, N. Sonnett, AK. South, G. Spann, W. Spears, S. Spencer,
www.famm.org – give thousands of readers news on sentenc- T. Spencer, RL. Spillarts, S. Sporkin, P. St Angelo, R. Stafford, E. Staggers, H. Stajcar, P. Sta-
ing issues and FAMM’s efforts, as well as the personal stories jcar, A. Stanberry, L. Stand, P. Stark, C. Starzman, A. Steele, R. Stein, D. Steiner, M.
of those affected by mandatory minimums. Stephens, S. Stephens, D. Stern, M. Stern, G. Stevens, C. Stewart, E. Stewart, J. Stewart, R.
On Tax Day, April 15, FAMM volunteers ask the public “Do Stoesen, S. Stone, R. Stoneburner, R. Storey, E. Stovall, H. Stovall, B & C. Stringfellow, C.
you know where your taxes go?” in outreach events outside of Stroud, T. Suits, G. Sullivan, I. Sullivan, P. Sullivan, L. Swanson, R. Swanson, C. Swarzen-
post offices from Iowa to Florida. struber, R. Sykes, P. Szura, F. Tabor, J. Taddeo, B. Talouzi, J. Tamayo, P. Tape, C. Tauro, E.
Taylor, J. Taylor, JD. Taylor, W. Taylor, E. Teal, J. Tennis, B & R. Thomas, C. Thomas, K.
The October issue of Reader’s Digest features an article
Thomas, M. Thomas, R. Thomas, T. Thomas, VC. Thomas, J. Thompson, E. Thost, E. Thur-
about FAMM member Monica Clyburn, who is serving 15
mond, D. Tibbetts, D. Tincher, A. Tinsey-Talabi, J. Tirpak, B. Tope, D. Torres, O. Torres, P.
years in federal prison for signing a pawn slip for a gun
Tozzi, J. Tracy, Y. Trotman, B. Truman, K. Truman, R. Tuer, M. Tyson, C. Valencia, S. Van Zoren,
owned by her boyfriend. FAMM worked with the author in M. Vance, J. VanWinkle, A. Vargas, AK. Vaugh, J. Vaughn, B. Vial, K. Vick, J. Vidal, V. Viranond,
developing the story. E. Voliton, J. Vopalka, S. Wachtler, H. Wade, E. Wagner, P. Wagner, M. Waldman, B. Walker,
Media across the country quote FAMM on the changing C. Walker, M. Wall, S. Washington, T. Watson, D. Watts, L. Watts, C. Webb, D. Webb, G. Webb,
landscape in sentencing reform. The result? Significant edito- B. Weggandt, C. Wehner, L. Welp, S. Welton, L. Wendel, I & P. Wender, P. Werley, J. Wesley,
rials appear in the Los Angeles Times, Louisville Courier C & W. West, E. Westbrook, M. Wheeler, R. Wheeler, P. Whisenant, A. White, D. White, N.
Journal, the Miami Herald, USA Today, and the Washington White, E. Whitney, C. Widener, R. Wielgosz, JL. Wilke, C. Williams, E. Williams, H. Williams,
Post, and airtime on local and National Public Radio. J. Williams, L. Williams, S. Williams, C. Wilson, M. Wilson, R. Wilson, E & R. Winsor, B. Win-
ston, E. Wishnow, J. Withers, BL. Witte, S. Wofford, L. Woodard, W. Woodard, J. Wyatt, J &
W. Wyatt, D. Young, D. Zlotnick, V. Zubko, J. Zuluaga
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 17
FAMM members use tax day
to educate on sentencing laws
When the taxman cometh on April 17 Pratt-Raffanel, director of operations. sands nonviolent drug offenders and ex-
this year – two days later than usual since “Tax Day gives FAMM members a timely plains mandatory sentencing laws. It also
April 15 falls on a non-business day, opportunity to educate citizens prison shows how drug treatment is more effec-
FAMM members will be out in force tive in handling the drug problem and
to hand out FAMM literature at post saves taxpayers money.
offices across the country. Many chapters participate in
Despite the well-publicized filing FAMM’s Tax Day efforts, but individu-
date for taxes and the availability of als can work on their own as well. Last
electronic filing, many taxpayers con- year, FAMM members distributed lit-
tinue to procrastinate, waiting until erature in Maryland, Iowa, California,
the last day to take their returns to the Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota,
post office. costs that are driven by mandatory sen- Oklahoma, North Carolina and Utah.
“As these people head to their local To find out how you can help, contact
post offices to get their returns stamped Central to the effort is a brochure,
your local FAMM chapter coordinator or
before midnight, they are less than en- “Do you know where your taxes go?” It
Andrea Strong, FAMM’s membership co-
thusiastic about paying their taxes and examines current national sentencing
ordinator. (Telephone numbers are on
usually quite surprised to hear how costly policies that cost taxpayers $23,000 annu-
the federal prison system is,” said Monica ally to incarcerate each of tens of thou-
New presentations with an audience of African Americans; Iowa members send
explain FAMM, • Where are they all gone? The impact of cards to 120 in prison
mandatory sentences on Latinos – a presen-
sentencing laws Members of the FAMM chapter in Cedar
tation for use with a Latino audience; and
Four new FAMM power-point presenta- • Youth at risk: The impact of manda- Rapids, Iowa, sent Christmas cards to more
tions help explain the need to change the tory minimum sentences on youth – a pres- than 120 incarcerated men and women.
nation’s mandatory minimum drug sen- entation for high school or college groups. “We all bought snacks, shared food
tencing laws and how FAMM works to and stories, and signed Christmas cards,”
change them. They have been sent to said coordinator Joann Jordan. “We had a
FAMM coordinators and ambassadors to
Holiday cheer fills good night, and I am getting a lot of nice
use at meetings with community, political Washington meeting letters thanking us. “Our cards were all
and religious organizations. At most FAMM meetings, Washington- many got and they were glad there are
FAMM members interested in using the area members are mostly business. They people who care.”
presentations can download them from the tell about their incarcerated family mem-
FAMM website, www.famm.org. A guide bers and then a member of the FAMM na-
Edeawo meets judge
for using the presentations is also available tional staff updates them on current legisla-
tion and litigation. Savannah ambassador Sky Edeawo dis-
on the website.
cussed FAMM with Judge Louisa Abbot, a
December is different. Members bring
The four are: local Superior Court judge, and her staff at-
food to share and gather to celebrate the sea-
• Mandatory minimum sentencing: A torney, Lisa Colbert. Judge Abbot, who has
son, and in years past, Dennis Sobin has played
failed policy – a presentation for general shown interest and support for Sky’s work
his guitar and led the group in singing Christ-
audiences; with incarcerated and formerly incarcerated
mas carols. This year members gathered as
• Where have they all gone? The impact women and youth, was also interested
usual, but Dennis had another commitment.
of mandatory minimum sentences on FAMM.
In his stead, Chris Walke, son of FAMM gen-
African Americans – a presentation for use
eral counsel Mary Price, played his guitar.
18 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
Litigation continues on halfway house eligibility
L itigationhouse practices of the
halfway What this means to you
federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). If you are incarcerated at institutions within the 3rd Circuit (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware),
In December 2002, the BOP unexpect- Woodall means the BOP should consider halfway house placement eligibility without regard to the Febru-
ary 2005 rule. (See BOP Program Statement 7310.04, Community Corrections Center (CCC) Utilization and
edly changed its historic halfway house
Transfer Procedure, (Dec. 16, 1998.) In other words, prisoners should ordinarily be considered for up to
practices by limiting prisoners’ placement
180 days’ halfway house placement without regard to sentence length. Woodall should also call into ques-
at Community Corrections Centers tion the bureau’s stated refusal to place individuals serving relatively short sentences directly at CCCs.
(CCCs), with limited exceptions, to the Those housed in other areas of the country must still mount legal challenges to the February
final 10 percent of one’s time served 2005 rule to secure greater halfway house time eligibility. If you are considering such an action,
(sentence length less good-time credit), please remember the following.
up to six months.1 The 10 percent rule effects those sentenced to 70 months or less, as others remain eligible for
After the only two appellate courts to six months’ halfway house.
The issue is one of eligibility not entitlement; courts striking down the December 2002 and Feb-
rule on prisoner challenges to these changes
ruary 2005 rules have not ordered the BOP to place successful litigants in a halfway house for
declared the changes unlawful, the BOP
six months. Instead, the BOP has been ordered to reconsider a prisoner’s halfway house trans-
tried again by submitting the new rule for fer date without regard to the unlawful restriction.
“notice-and-comment” in the Federal Regis- Home confinement is still limited by 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c) to the final 10 percent of one’s time
ter.2 (The notice-and-comment process is served; that is, the BOP is expressly guided by statute when considering such designations.
the procedure federal agencies follow when
adopting new rules or changing existing
ones.) One reason the courts rejected the correctly ignores the enumerated factors that is unclear, the Woodall court disagreed.
December 2002 rule was that the BOP failed the bureau must consider under 18 U.S.C. § The court said Congress’s intent was
to follow that process. The ‘new’ rules, 3621(b) when making placement and trans- clear: the bureau is obliged to make individ-
which went into effect in February 2005, fer determinations. Woodall v. Federal Bu- ualized placement determinations that ac-
implement the same 10 percent restriction reau of Prisons, 432 F.3d 235 (3d Cir. 2005). count for all § 3621(b) considerations. Even
as the December 2002 change. Where the BOP argued that the courts if congressional intent were vague, the court
should defer to its determination because found that February 2005 rule is based on
Litigation concerning the February 2005
the statute governing use of halfway houses flawed interpretation of the statute and thus
change has been as intense as that over its
predecessor. FAMM, with the assistance of
the law firm of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver
& Jacobson and Litigation Advisory Board VA aids transitioning veterans
members Peter Goldberger and Todd
Bussert, submitted an amicus brief in the
first court of appeals’ challenge to the 2005 A variety of Veterans Administration
(VA) Medical Centers have coordi-
Health Care for Homeless Veteran
(HCHV) programs to provide reentry and
rule. But before the court could rule the nated and/or formalized agreements with support services, Schaffer writes. Among
prisoner was released on his 10 percent date. local penal institutions to either provide di- services and support being provided in-
rect services to incarcerated veterans, or clude psycho-education and support pro-
This past December, however, the U.S.
more commonly, to provide pre release gramming, incarcerated veteran resource
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit struck
outreach, according Bradley Schaffer, VA manuals for veterans and families, prere-
down the February 2005 rule because it in-
Medical Center, Cincinnati. lease services to help veterans’ transition
Historically, veterans under charges, in- back to the community and post-release
1. See “Halfway house policy change curtails placement
carceration or on parole do not forfeit their linkage to residential programs to assist
opportunities,” Spring 2003 FAMMGram, page 26; “Front
or back, a halfway house is still a correctional facility,” eligibility for VA medical care, but VA does the veteran in seeking housing, employ-
Winter 2003 FAMMGram, page 27; “Developments con- not, and never has, operated health care fa- ment, vocational, primary care and men-
tinue in halfway house litigation effort,” Spring 2004 tal health treatments.
FAMMGram, page 15. cilities which are equipped to care for indi-
2. “Cases question halfway house rule” (discussing
viduals requiring criminal incarceration (38 Check with the nearest VA office for fur-
Goldings v. Winn, 383 F.3d 17 (1st Cir. 2004) and Elwood U.S.C. 1710(g)). ther information or go to the VA website,
v. Jeter, 386 F.3d 842 (8th Cir. 2004)), Winter 2004 FAM- www.va.gov.
Most VA staff work through their
MGram, page 20.
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 19
invalid. Likewise, the appellate panel rejected apprenticeship courses; library resources;
the BOP’s assertion that it had properly availability of UNICOR; counseling, health
taken a categorical approach to the halfway
house issue. The court found that such a cat-
and religious services; smoking areas; fitness/
recreation resources; telephone, commissary,
egorical approach ignores the § 3621(b) mail, and visitation policies; and lodgings and
mandate that the bureau make individual-
ized determinations about where to house
accommodations near the facility.
now 36, served almost
S erena Nunn,16-year drug sentence
11 years of a
Several chapters discuss various aspects before receiving a presidential commuta-
prisoners without limitations. of the federal criminal justice system that tion in July 2000. After her release, she
are specific to both legal professionals and earned a degree in political science from
Prison guidebook helps Arizona State University and in May fin-
understand system Because the BOP operates over 100 facil- ishes a law degree from the University of
ities, the guidebook can be helpful when an Michigan.
The 2005-2006 edition of the “Federal
incarcerated person is transferred to an- Serena’s perseverance in becoming a
Prison Guidebook” is now available. It is
other facility and wants to know what to ex- lawyer was guided in part by a lesson she
an informative reference manual for attor-
pect there. The paperback edition is $79.95, learned from her grandmother, she told
neys, judges, defendants, incarcerated per-
but the cost is only $29.95 for those who are the St. Paul Pioneer Press in January. “It
sons and their families wanting to learn
incarcerated or family members sending a was to never let go of your dreams, and to
more about the federal Bureau of Prisons
copy to them. Go to www.alanellis.com for accept whatever happens in your life, you
(BOP) facilities and practices.
an order form or contact the law offices of just outlive the bad things by pushing on
Listing almost every BOP facility and re- Alan Ellis: 910 Irwin Street, San Rafael, CA and doing the good things.”
gional office, the guidebook details various 94901, (415) 460-1430.
“The greatest joy for me so far, and
programs and aspects of prison life at each fa-
something I want to pursue, is to help poor
cility, including educational, vocational, and
Sisters offer women and indigent people who seem to have no
voice in society,” Serena said in the inter-
a transitional home
view. “I also want to speak to people, partic-
FAMM thanks The Sisters of St. Francis now offer a ularly young people, about the need for
Pekin women helping hand to women leaving Iowa’s three them to understand how one wrong deci-
for contribution women’s prisons: a transitional home that sion can have such an impact or conse-
provides a supportive community and men- quence in one’s life.”
FAMM extends a heartfelt thanks
toring for the women as they begin to
to the women of FCI Pekin who con- After serving six years of a 19-year,
reestablish themselves in the community.
tributed $680 to FAMM during the seven-month sentence, Loretta Fish re-
recent matching grant drive. Sister Gwen Hennessey, an Iowa FAMM ceived a commutation from President
member, is the live-in manager of the new Clinton on his last day in office in January
Ruth Carter and Diana Webb, who
Clare Guest House, a nondenominational 2001. FAMM’s efforts to seek commuta-
helped organize the campaign, give
home in Sioux City. She gained an under- tions for FAMM members helped secure
special thanks to the FCI personnel
standing of the homes’ residents from her the releases of Fish and 16 others.
who made the fund drive possible: R.
own prison sentence for civil disobedience.
Veach, warden; Lori Colley, camp ad- After obtaining her freedom, Loretta spent
“I walked the walk,” she told the Sioux City
ministrator; Cleo Jones, camp educa- two years in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania
Journal. “I know a bit about what it’s like
tion; and Paul Sailor, staff facilitator. and then returned to Alderson, W. Va., to visit
to be looked at and treated as an object.”
a friend with whom she had served time.
They also thank members of the
Women must commit to stay at the While in West Virginia she also looked up her
FAMM committee: Lori Kavitz,
home for at least two months and no more retired prison counselor, whom she married
Mandy Martinson, Chris Williams,
than six months. They must look for work, two months later. Now 49, Loretta completed
Susan Bala, Joyce Ramos, Deloris
meet regularly with their mentors, partici- a one-year program to become a licensed
Lymas and Deb Parham collected
pate in the house’s community life and practical nurse but, because of her felony
donations, and Julie Rettenberger
help with chores. No drugs or alcohol are record, has faced employment hurdles.
constructed a banner for the event.
permitted, and a nightly curfew exists. “Everyone makes a mistake in life,” Fish
The 42 names of those who con-
tributed $10 or more are included in Donations may be sent to Sr. Gwen told the Allentown, Pa., Morning Call in
the honor roll of FAMM donors, Hennessey, Clare Guest House, 1918 January. “I feel anyone that shows a sincere
page 16. Douglas, Sioux City, IA 51104. effort at changing their life around deserves
a second chance.”
20 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
1612 K Street NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20006 • (202) 822-6700 • fax (202) 822-6704 • www.famm.org
Families Against Mandatory Minimums
Name _____________________________________________ ❏ Federal Charge ❏ State Charge
ID# _______________________________________________ Education __________________________________________
Prisoner’s Date of Birth _______________________________
Ethnicity ___________________Race ___________________
State _____________________Zip _____________________ US Citizen? ❏ yes ❏ no If not, what country? __________
OFFENSE Judge’s name_________________________________________
Court ___________________Date of sentencing_____________
Year and state in which offense occurred ___________________
Type(s) of drug(s) ______________________________________
Estimated release date__________________________________
Have you filed a direct appeal? ❏ yes ❏ no Date_______
If not drugs, other charge _______________________________
Have you filed any post-conviction motions? ❏ yes ❏ no
Were weapons involved in the offense? ❏ yes ❏ no
If yes, what type(s)? _________________________________ Date______________
Were you convicted for a weapons offense? ❏ yes ❏ no Was your sentence increased for weapons? ❏ yes ❏ no
Were you convicted/charged with conspiracy? ❏ yes ❏ no
SENTENCE Was a confidential informant involved? ❏ yes ❏ no
Length of sentence: years__________ months____________ Did the informant get a shorter sentence? ❏ yes ❏ no
Was the prisoner sentenced to a mandatory minimum Were any drugs seized? ❏ yes ❏ no
sentence? ❏ yes ❏ no Do you have any prior offense(s)? ❏ yes ❏ no
Habitual offender/3 Strikes? ❏ yes ❏ no If yes, list offense(s) and year(s): _______________________
a. Original Guideline Level____________________________ _________________________________________________
b. Adjusted Guideline Level ___________________________ _________________________________________________
c. Did you benefit from the safety valve? ❏ yes ❏ no _________________________________________________
d. Did you receive a mitigating role adjustment? ❏ yes ❏ no Did the judge depart from the mandatory sentence or guidelines?
❏ yes ❏ no
Was there a plea bargain? ❏ yes ❏ no
Trial? ❏ yes ❏ no
Forfeiture? ❏ yes ❏ no
If yes, what kind? ❏ criminal ❏ civil
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 21
SYMPATHETIC FACTORS FAMILY
At sentencing, did the judge say he/she wished he/she didn’t Number of children____________ ages____________________
have to give you such a long sentence? ❏ yes ❏ no
Family’s distance from prisoner, in miles ___________________
Please include summary of statement. ___________________
Who supports family? __________________________________
___________________________________________________ Who cares for children?_________________________________
List any health problems: _______________________________ Name of lawyer(s)/public defender ________________________
___________________________________________________ Lawyer’s telephone ( ) ____________________________
Do you have substance abuse problems? ❏ yes ❏ no
Contact on the outside authorized to provide additional facts
If yes, any treatment received? ___________________________
about the case:
Relation to prisoner _________________________________
Are any of the following available for reference, if
necessary? (Please do not send unless requested.) Address___________________________________________
❏ Presentence report (PSR) ❏ Sentencing transcripts _________________________________________________
❏ Media clippings ❏ Photo of prisoner/family City ______________________________________________
Telephone (evening) _________________________________
On a separate sheet, please write a brief personal account of what happened (1-2 pages) and list any additional factors you believe
may assist us in understanding your case.
FAMM works to repeal mandatory minimum sentences by publi- I hereby release Families Against Mandatory Minimums,
cizing cases that dramatize the unfairness of these laws. FAMM Families Against Mandatory Minimums Foundation, and any
does not employ attorneys to represent individual cases. It is es- news organization from any liability whatsoever from any
sential that the facts represented by FAMM and reported in this cause and for any reason, in connection with the release,
summary be accurate. If you do not know an answer, write “don’t dissemination, and publication of statements and informa-
know.” There may be a risk that publicized cases might draw a tion about me and the crimes for which I have been charged
critical reaction. If you do not want your case publicized, do not or convicted.
put your signature at the bottom of this form.
Prisoner’s signature _______________________________
Families Against Mandatory Minimums
1612 K Street NW, Suite 700 • Washington, DC 20006 ❏ photo enclosed
(202) 822-6700 • fax (202) 822-6704 • www.famm.org
22 FAMMGRAM Spring 2006
The names and addresses of FAMM chapter coordinators and ambassadors, not accept collect calls. If you can’t reach a volunteer, call Andrea Strong,
or those hoping to organize chapters in their areas, are listed below. Please (859) 586-6863. Continue to send all correspondence and membership
get involved with the group in your area to develop local activities. Remem- forms to FAMM, 1612 K St. N.W., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20006.
ber, the volunteers are donating their time and resources to FAMM and do *Indicates a new chapter or change of address.
ARKANSAS CALIFORNIA MASSACHUSETTS OREGON WISCONSIN
Barbara Wilder Craig and Sharon North Marie Russo Lorraine Heller Robin Baldeh
P.O. Box 67 P.O. Box 4012 P.O. Box 365 9601 NW Leahy Rd., #301 120 1/2 East James Street
Mayflower, AR 72106 Yankee Hill, CA 95965 Revere, MA 02151 Portland, OR 97229 Columbus, WI 53925
(501) 327-6112 (530) 534-5121 (phone/fax) (781) 334-5947 (503) 292-5364 (920) 623-9767
firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
FLORIDA FLORIDA MISSOURI TENNESSEE
6828 W. Wisconsin Ave.
Bob Batey Ruth Kelley *Ollie Stewart Rita Wilbourn
Wauwatosa, WI 53213
1401 61st St. South P.O. Box 11083 3017 Park Avenue Tracy Long
St. Petersburg, FL 33707 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33339 St. Louis, MO 63104 P.O. Box 435
(727) 562-7852 (954) 776-4934 (314) 664-5024 Whitwell, TN 37397 Gale McKnight
email@example.com RNK4729@bellsouth.net (423) 658-2577 423 Hatten Ave., Apt. 228
Jan Wood Rice Lake, WI 54868
Susan Kennedy Morin P.O. Box 30304
GEORGIA TEXAS (715) 736-1920
P.O. Box 771952 Kansas City, MO 64112
Cathryn Ferrigno Bill Boman
Ocala, FL 34777 (816) 803-3457
P.O. Box 566802 P.O. Box 75123
(352) 344-3415 firstname.lastname@example.org
Atlanta, GA 31156 Houston, TX 77234
(404) 808-8845 (713) 944-4700
email@example.com (713) 944-4722 (fax)
GEORGIA Dorothy Behler
Sky Edeawo P.O. Box 501
P.O. Box 61660 Valley, NE 68064 WEST VIRGINIA
Savannah, GA 31420 (402) 625-2575 Michael Lemery
P.O. Box 8092
(912) 351-1681 firstname.lastname@example.org 496 Easton Mill Road
Cedar Rapids, IA 52408
(319) 396-5740 Mamasky07@aol.com Morgantown, WV 26508
NEW HAMPSHIRE (304) 296-5980
KANSAS Nancy Brown email@example.com
MARYLAND Sandi Marion P.O. Box 365
Bessie Morgan P.O. Box 22 Revere, MA 02151
3610 Tyrol Drive Atlanta, KS 67008 (603) 436-7861
Springdale, MD 20774 (620) 394-2734 firstname.lastname@example.org
(301) 386-3417 email@example.com
KENTUCKY James Muscoreil, Sr.
Mary Leah Atkinson 3505 Wilson-Cambria Rd.
P.O. Box 15007 3175 Roxburg Wilson, NY 14172 ARKANSAS. Little Rock. Second Tuesday, 6-7:45 p.m. Main
Lansing, MI 48901-5007 Lexington, KY 40503 (716) 751-9213
Library, 100 Rock St. Call (501) 327-6112 to confirm.
(313) 835-1840 or (859) 223-7304 firstname.lastname@example.org
(517) 487-1261 email@example.com FLORIDA. Tampa/St. Petersburg. Third Wednesday. Call (727)
OHIO 562-7852 to confirm.
MARYLAND Delphine Fuller
Sylvia Williams 3301 N Erie St. GEORGIA. Atlanta. Third Thursday, 6:30 pm, St. John’s
513 E. 41st Toledo, OH 43611 Lutheran Church, 1410 Ponce de Leon Ave. Call
Baltimore, MD 21218 (419) 727-8266 (404) 808-8845 for information.
BigSyl2003@yahoo.com OKLAHOMA IOWA. Cedar Rapids. Third Wednesday, 7 p.m., Cedar Rapids
Dianne Hunter Public Library. Call (319) 396-5740 to confirm.
3100 Garden Vista
Edmond, OK 73034 MARYLAND. Prince George’s County. Fourth Saturday,
Questions? (405) 844-0816 10 a.m., First Baptist Church of Highland Park in Landover.
firstname.lastname@example.org Call (301) 386-3417 to confirm.
Contact FAMM’s director of
member services: MICHIGAN. Detroit. Last Saturday. (New location) Fellow-
ship Church, 7707 W. Outer Drive. Call (313) 835-1840 or
Andrea Strong (517) 487-1261 for info or (313) 531-5980 for directions.
6018 Ethan Drive
Burlington, KY 41005 WASHINGTON, D.C. Usually first Saturday, 10 a.m., Christ
(859) 586-6863 (phone/fax) Church, 620 G Street, SE. Call (202) 822-6700 to confirm.
Spring 2006 FAMMGRAM 23
FAMM National Office
1612 K Street NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 822-6704 fax
MICHIGAN State Office
P.O. Box 15007
Lansing, MI 48901-5007
(517) 487-1261, Tom Burkert
(517) 487-1226, Laura Sager
(517) 487-1756 fax, days only
Help commemorate FAMM’s
NEW JERSEY State Office 15 years of advocacy
119 S. Warren Street
2nd Floor, Unit 2
Trenton, NJ 08608 In 1991, Julie Stewart founded Families Against
(609) 392-0050, Dea DeWitt Mandatory Minimums. This fall FAMM will mark its
(609) 392-5084 2nd line 15th year of advocacy with a gala fundraising dinner
(609) 392-7923 fax
in Washington, D.C. FAMM will also host a panel
NORTH CAROLINA State Office discussion on Capitol Hill to mark the 20th
115 Market Street, Suite 360-C anniversary of mandatory minimum sentences.
Durham, NC 27701
(919) 530-8077, LaFonda Jones-General Look for the date and further information about
(919) 530-8079 fax the two events in the next issue of FAMMGram.
FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS Merrifield, VA
1612 K Street NW, Suite 700 | Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (202) 822-6700 | Fax: (202) 822-6704
Email: email@example.com | Website: www.famm.org