October 15, 2010
US Sentencing Commission action to implement FSA and new crack guidelines
As detailed in this public notice, the United States Sentencing Commission has a public meeting scheduled for this afternoon in DC, and the agenda includes "Possible Vote to Promulgate Emergency, Temporary Amendment (implementing the statutory changes regarding crack cocaine offenses and directives regarding drug trafficking offenses generally set forth in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010." These proposed amendments were previously set out by the USSC here.
Relatedly, the USSC has now posted here the materials "received by the Commission in response to its request for public comment (implementing the statutory changes regarding crack cocaine offenses and directives regarding drug trafficking offenses generally set forth in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010." Here are links to all this stuff:
UPDATE: As detailed in this news release, on late Friday "the United States Sentencing Commission voted to promulgate a temporary, emergency amendment to the federal sentencing guidelines consistent with the statutory changes to crack cocaine and other drug trafficking offenses made by the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 [which] will take effect on November 1, 2010."
The release explains that the "Commission estimates that the new average sentence for trafficking in crack cocaine will be 101 months, a 13.7 percent decrease in average sentence length. The Commission estimates that more than 1,500 prison beds will be saved after five years and that more than 3,800 beds will be saved after ten years."
October 15, 2010 at 12:00 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference US Sentencing Commission action to implement FSA and new crack guidelines:
The Commission will not tolerate advocacy for public safety, it appears from that list. All are pro-criminal extremists.
All depend on the comfort of the criminal for their jobs. The work of this commission will have no moral validity, given the irremediable, economic conflict of interests of its testifying parties.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 16, 2010 7:07:43 PM
Does this mean it went RETRO or is this just for those being sentenced after this bill became law?
Posted by: Beth Gilroy | Oct 18, 2010 4:10:03 PM
Doug: As of Monday at 4:30 pm the commission has still not posted on its site exactly what it is that it decided to do in the Temp FSA Amendments. There were options given in the proposal, after all. Please post for us as soon as you can determine all of what was decided. Also, who was the dissenter, and why?
Posted by: Peter G | Oct 18, 2010 4:28:41 PM