New amendments to federal sentencing guidelines will put less of an emphasis on the quantity of drugs someone was charged with, and give more consideration to the scope of their role in the overall drug distribution chain. The United States Sentencing Commission implemented the amendments November 1.
Federal sentencing is calculated using a deeply convoluted scoring system that assigns a base offense level (BOL) between 1 and 43, according to how serious a conviction is perceived to be. For drug-trafficking, this is determined partly through a Drug Quantity Table that uses the number of grams involved to assign a BOL that—prior to the new amendments—could be between 6 and 38. But about two out of three people were being sentenced using a BOL of between 30 and 38.
The fixation with quantity as the biggest factor in how serious each case made it easy to prosecute local distributors as if they were high-level members of drug trafficking organizations. Neighborhood sellers who might only deal in relatively small quantities could still be assigned a BOL for much larger quantities, if the number was measured over a long period of time or manipulated in other ways.
The length of someone’s prison sentence also depends on other factors like prior convictions, but a higher BOL correlates to a longer sentence. For a BOL of 37 or higher, the upper end of the sentencing range can be life in prison, depending on the person’s criminal-legal history.
Now, BOL will be capped at 32 for people determined to have a “mitigating role” in the violation—meaning those at the lower end of the supply chain—and the USSC is supporting a broader application of that standard. A BOL of 32 means a sentencing range of roughly between 10 and 22 years.
“An adjustment…is generally warranted if the defendant’s primary function in the offense was plainly among the lowest level of drug trafficking functions, such as serving as a courier, running errands, sending or receiving phone calls or messages, or acting as a lookout,” state the guidelines. “[Or] if the defendant’s primary function in the offense was performing another low-level trafficking function, such as distributing controlled substances in user-level quantities for little or no monetary compensation or with a primary motivation other than profit.”
Primary motivations other than profit could include personal relationships, or being threatened or coerced. The USSC is still considering whether to apply the adjustment retroactively.
Hellbound and Down 