State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape
Drug overdoses now exceed motor vehicle accidents as a cause of death among Americans. With the opioid crisis reaching new heights, lawmakers are clamoring for ways to curb the death toll or at least make it seem like they’re doing something in the eyes of the public. Unfortunately, that often translates to reactionary increases in already harsh drug penalties.
One such overreaction? Amendment 807 to the federal sentencing guidelines. Effective as of November 2018, section 2D1.1(b)(13) imposes a mandatory four-level enhancement for those who knowingly misrepresent or market fentanyl-laced drugs. “Level” refers to the grid that judges use to determine the appropriate sentence range. The starting point (presumptive sentence) depends on the defendant’s criminal history, the offense, and other relevant factors – including whether any “special offense characteristics” apply. Those factors can move a presumptive sentence upward on the grid, resulting in a much harsher penalty.
The fentanyl enhancement is a special offense characteristic that applies to a broad range of federal drug offenses, including:
The impact on sentence length is tremendous. For an offender with no criminal history caught with four to eight grams of fentanyl, it means that a presumptive sentence of 18-24 months shoots up to 30-37 months. It’s the biggest sentencing enhancement in existence for federal drug cases.
Fentanyl is an easy target because it contributes to a significant number of fatal opioid overdoses. While some involve pure fentanyl, most 70 percent of fatal fentanyl overdoses involve other substances. Heroin, cocaine, methamphetamines, and black-market opioids are often laced with fentanyl. It’s cheap, fast, and easy to produce.
Fentanyl is both extremely potent – fast-acting and up to 60 to 100 times more powerful than morphine – and extremely deadly. Death from overdose can occur in a matter of minutes. And because users are often inexperienced or unaware of its presence, the risk of death skyrockets with fentanyl-laced drugs.
For all of these reasons, fentanyl has become a buzzword in drug policy and a major source of political currency. It’s therefore not surprising that 39 states (including North Carolina) and D.C. have enacted harsher penalties for fentanyl in the last decade.
Punitive measures are woefully inadequate when it comes to saving lives or constraining the drug trade. Research has repeatedly shown that cracking down with harsher penalties doesn’t have any measurable deterrent effect. The reasons for this inefficacy are numerous: illicit manufacturers are driven by profit, not potential penalties. Street-level dealers and couriers are even less likely to be motivated by the specter of harsher penalties. At the federal level, the existing penalties for fentanyl-related offenses were already harsh, with mandatory minimums ranging from five years to live without parole.
What’s more, the enhancement is almost certain to have a racially disparate impact. Poverty-stricken minorities are far more likely to engage in low-level dealing or “muling” as a means to fund their addiction. Wealthy suburbanites – who can afford more pure varieties and have no financial need to traffic drugs – won’t be impacted.
The enhancement is reminiscent of the crack-cocaine mandatory minimums that disproportionally landed minorities behind bars. The First Step Act reversed those minimums, but by the time it was enacted in late 2018, the fentanyl amendment was already in effect. One step forward, one step back.
The enhancement includes a men’s rea element, applying only to offenders who “knowingly” sold or marketed fentanyl-laced drugs. Street-level dealers and couriers rarely know the exact chemical compositions of their products. They’re not chemists.
Regardless, most of these cases are resolved through plea bargaining. The enhancement thus gives federal prosecutors powerful leverage to flip defendants or extract valuable testimony in exchange for “shorter” prison sentences. Those sentences, though, are still likely to be extremely harsh. And federal prosecutors already have plenty of tools for pressuring defendants to plead guilty.
It remains to be seen whether more effective, nonpunitive measures – such as treatment options, drugs courts, and alternative dispositions – will ever rise to the top of federal drug policy. In these politically heated times, it’s doubtful.
State v. B.S.: Not Guilty Verdict in First Degree Murder Case.
In this case, our client was charged with First Degree Murder in connection with a “drive-by” shooting that occurred in Charlotte, NC. The State’s evidence included GPS ankle monitoring data linking our client was at the scene of the crime and evidence that our client confessed to an inmate while in jail. Nonetheless, we convinced a jury to unanimously find our client Not Guilty. He was released from jail the same day.
State v. S.G.: First Degree Murder Charge Dismissed.
Our client was charged with First Degree for the shooting death related to alleged breaking and entering. The State’s evidence included a co-defendant alleging that our client was the shooter. After conducting a thorough investigation with the use of a private investigator, we persuaded the State to dismiss entirely the case against our client.
State v. B.D.: First Degree Murder Charged Dismissed.
After conducting an investigation and communicating with the prosecutor about the facts and circumstances indicating that our client acted in self-defense, the case was dismissed and deemed a justifiable homicide.
State v. I.R.: Reduction from First Degree Murder to Involuntary Manslaughter and Concealment of Death.
Our client was charged with the First Degree Murder of a young lady by drug overdose. After investigating the decedent’s background and hiring a preeminent expert toxicologist to fight the State’s theory of death, we were able to negotiate this case down from Life in prison to 5 years in prison, with credit for time served.
State v. J.G.:
Our client was charged with First Degree Murder related to a “drug deal gone bad.” After engaging the services of a private investigator and noting issues with the State’s case, we were able to negotiate a plea for our client that avoided a Life sentence and required him to serve only 12 years.
State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape
State v. B.S. – First Degree Murder
State v. E.D. – Identity Theft
State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape
Each case is different and must be evaluated on its individual facts. We work hard to assess each case individually. Prior results do not guarantee any future outcome.
Fields marked with an * are required
Call 919-838-6643 to schedule a free initial consultation. Offices open weekdays 8am – 7pm, Saturdays 9am – 5pm
*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories — legal ability and general ethical standards.
© 2023 Roberts Marcilliat & Mills PLLC. All Rights Reserved.