ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Tuesday, February 27, 1996 TAG: 9602270124
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-3 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
SOURCE: Cox News Service
A CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DEFENDER argued before the Supreme Court on Monday that many more blacks than whites are prosecuted in crack cocaine cases.
Accusing prosecutors of targeting blacks for trial in crack cocaine cases, attorneys argued Monday before the U.S. Supreme Court that defendants have the right to know how prosecutors decide which cases to take to court.
Historically, prosecutors have enjoyed broad discretion over which cases to try, but Los Angeles public defender Barbara E. O'Connor argued that black crack offenders were often prosecuted in federal court, while non-black crack offenders were prosecuted in state court, where sentences for the same crime are less severe.
In a preliminary brief, O'Connor warned that ``because prosecutors have such broad discretion in making charging decisions, and because those decisions are generally free from oversight, there is ample room for discrimination.''
But Solicitor General Drew Days told the court that prosecutors should not have to justify their decisions without defense lawyers presenting more statistical data to prove that discrimination exists.
Days said forcing prosecutors to disclose charging procedures is not necessary because current law already allows prosecutors to be punished for targeting groups.
In this case, U.S. vs. Armstrong, O'Connor defended five black men indicted in federal court on charges of possessing crack cocaine and weapons in Los Angeles. Her office conducted a study of Central California federal court records showing that of 53 cases from 1991 to 1993 involving crack cocaine charges, no defendant was white. She sought permission to determine why no whites had been prosecuted for similar charges.
When prosecutors refused to disclose information about their procedures, a federal district judge dismissed the charges against the five defendants. The ruling was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but further appealed to the Supreme Court. A decision is expected by this summer.
Justice Antonin Scalia said that if a prosecutor discriminates, he should be punished, but asked, ``why should the whole U.S. attorney's office be punished for the act of one bad attorney?''
The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, in a friend of the court brief, argued that this case highlights discrimination towards blacks in the same way the new crack cocaine sentencing guidelines do. The 1995 law punishes crack cocaine crimes 100 times more severely than powder cocaine crimes.
LENGTH: Medium: 56 lines ILLUSTRATION: PHOTO: AP. Rep. Jessee Jackson Jr., D-Ill., leaves the Supremeby CNBCourt after observing arguments on racial bias Monday.