Newest Trends in Sentencing Relief
By Derek Gilna
Although
there was nothing of great substance to report on the Congressional front in
the quest for retroactive sentencing relief, the two-level drug reduction and
clemency cases continue to move slowly and at an uneven pace through the
justice system, depending upon your court’s location, case load, and level of
interest. There is also some news to
report on both life sentences and sex cases, based upon new U.S. Sentencing
Commission (SC) reports.
To put all
of this in perspective, a quick analysis on how the federal bureaucracy works
is in order. First, there is a private
discussion among prisoner relief organizations, members of Congress and their
staff, and the Sentencing Commission. At
some point, this discussion goes public, but the broad parameters of relief
have already been decided behind closed doors.
This was the pattern followed in the crack reductions, the two-level reductions, and the pending
white-collar reductions.
However, it
has been little noticed that the high number of drug-related, non-violent
offenses has been the subject of a March, 2015 SC report which indirectly
criticizes the number of such sentences (most of which are given after an
adverse trial verdict), and notes that many other mandatory minimum sentences
also are in effect life sentences, given the offender’s life expectancy. Sex
offender sentencing earlier came under similar scrutiny by the SC in early
2013, with little follow-up discussion in the media thereafter. Nonetheless, it does appear that some
behind-the-scenes dialogue is taking place on these draconian sentences that
bear little relationship to actual harm caused.
The SC called the sentencing levels “outdated” and subject to
“widespread inconsistent application.” When further progress is noted on both
areas, I will so advise you.
In the
meantime, I am available to handle any
issue that you might have in the court system and the prison system, including
moving along any filings that you already have dragging along without apparent
progress. To the extent that direct, non-pro se legal action is needed in the
many scattered federal district courts, I work with attorneys all over the
country who charge reasonable fees and who are pleased to present the pleadings
or other documents that I have drafted. I have been involved in the federal
courts not for months or years, but decades.
Put that experience and perspective to work for you.
Derek Gilna
113 McHenry #173
(847) 878-0160
