Judge Wolf raps focus on guns, drugs on US docket

Boston Globe via Sierra Times ^ | 02/06/04 | Shelley Murphy

[heckler]

A federal judge yesterday accused the US attorney's office in Massachusetts of spending too much time on drug and gun cases that belong in state court, instead of focusing on federal crimes such as public corruption and white-collar offenses that he said would have a greater impact on society.

"When federal prosecutors are preoccupied with presenting cases that have been investigated by state and local agencies, there's a real opportunity cost, and it means they're not doing the longer term, grand jury-type investigations which are likely to get the bigger and morally more culpable people," Wolf said

Although Wolf just finished presiding over the carjacking and murder trial of Gary Lee Sampson, who became the first person in Massachusetts sentenced to die under the federal death penalty, he repeatedly stressed that he wasn't talking about the Sampson case and that his criticism wasn't related to that case.

Stung by Wolf's criticism, Sullivan said that the judge is "simply wrong" and should focus on his own job, instead of worrying about Sullivan's.

"He obviously believes that he could do a much better job managing the office," Sullivan said. "But the fact of the matter is that's not his job, it's mine.

"I would disagree with his characterization of the office," the US attorney said. "He just doesn't have accurate information."

It was not the first time that Wolf and Sullivan have sparred over how the US attorney's office is run.

In November 2002, Wolf ordered Sullivan to appear in his courtroom to respond to allegations that prosecutors had either failed to turn over evidence to defense lawyers in criminal cases or had belatedly done so.

Wolf is the only federal judge in Boston to order the US attorney to appear before him. He has done so three times, with Sullivan and two of his predecessors.

In the 2002 case, Sullivan was miffed because he was at the dentist when he learned that Wolf had ordered his presence in his courtroom an hour later. Wolf threatened to hold Sullivan in contempt when he didn't show up. He did appear the following week.

Yesterday, Wolf said his comments were not directed solely at Sullivan, who was appointed US attorney by Attorney General John D. Ashcroft in the fall of 2001. Wolf acknowledged that federal prosecutors first started bringing state drug and gun cases into federal courts in the late 1980s, as part of a national initiative to target urban violence.

But Wolf said the trend has become a problem as it has escalated in recent years, with more cases involving low-level drug dealers.

"Drug crimes are very serious; they destroy the lives of individuals, families, and communities," he said. "I'm not suggesting that these crimes are unimportant. But it's never been the case in this country that people felt that every case that was important should be a federal case, and the federal courts have limited resources."

Wolf, a deputy US attorney and chief of the public corruption unit under US Attorney William F. Weld from 1981 to 1985, said he decided to go public with his concerns because he has a reverence for the US Department of Justice and because he believes it should do better.

He worked in Washington for the Justice Department in the 1970s, first as special assistant to the US deputy attorney general and then as special assistant to the US attorney general.

Wolf said he was upset that federal judges have been portrayed as "soft on crime," leading to the Feeney Amendment, which Congress passed last year to require the US Sentencing Commission to keep records of judges who sentence defendants to less time than called for under federal sentencing guidelines.

"The federal judges are not soft on crime, but there are a lot of federal judges who know what a real federal crime is," said Wolf. "We deal with the cases that are brought to us."

In January, Wolf said he sentenced a Cape Cod woman convicted of heroin charges to two years in prison, three months less than called for under sentencing guidelines, because she suffered from bipolar disorder, was a heroin addict, and had a history of other problems. He said he was disturbed that a Rhode Island man who supplied heroin to the Cape Cod ring was not indicted, even though he had been identified.

At that sentencing, Wolf said: "It's entirely up to the Department of Justice to decide how to devote its limited resources. But it's up to every citizen to make a judgment as to whether those choices are being made in a way that really serves the public interest."

Now, because of the Feeney Amendment and the Justice Department's aggressive strategy in appealing sentences in which the judge departed from federal sentencing guidelines, Wolf said it is possible that a federal prosecutor will spend time appealing a three-month sentencing disparity, instead of chasing the drug ring's supplier.

Sullivan said no decision has been made on whether to appeal the heroin addict's sentence.

Sullivan said the crime-fighting strategy employed by federal prosecutors today is much different from what it was when Wolf worked in the US attorney's office 20 years ago. He said Ashcroft has asked all of the nation's US attorneys to develop strategies to reduce gun violence in their districts, an approach they believe has helped reduce violent crime.

"We can't turn our backs on neighborhoods because a judge believes we shouldn't be prosecuting these cases," Sullivan said. "Congress decides what conduct is a federal crime. We decide which cases we're going to bring federally."

Sullivan also insisted that his office's efforts in targeting drugs and guns have not kept his prosecutors from bringing significant organized crime, white collar, and antiterrorism cases. He noted that the office's health-care fraud unit is nationally acclaimed.

Sullivan said he doesn't criticize the federal judiciary, even though he believes there are things the court could do differently and "much more efficiently."

[heckler]

Long article. I've heard of this judge before but dont remember where. My guess is that he's a typical bleeding heart lefty, am I wrong?

[heckler]

BANG

[dasboot]

Kudos to Wolf. I don't know if he's lib or con, but he has the right notion about federalism.

[Lurking Libertarian]

My guess is that he's a typical bleeding heart lefty, am I wrong?

According to his bio, he was appointed by Ronald Reagan.

[Paleo Conservative]

A federal judge yesterday accused the US attorney's office in Massachusetts of spending too much time on drug and gun cases that belong in state court, instead of focusing on federal crimes such as public corruption and white-collar offenses that he said would have a greater impact on society.

heckler
My guess is that he's a typical bleeding heart lefty, am I wrong?

Yes. You are wrong, and dasboot is correct. In fact it is very dangerous to have the federal government prosecuting ordinary crimes that belong in state courts. There is less political accountability to prevent malicious prosecution. It also allows for more unconstitutional double jeopardy where the feds re-prosecute defendants who have been acquitted in state courts like the police who arrested and beat up Rodney King.

[William Tell]

The judge has a simple remedy. He can rule that the Bill of Rights prohibits infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. This will eliminate all charges related only to firearms.

The judge can also rule that the Constitution provides no power to the federal government to prosecute drug cases which have no real connection with interstate commerce.

[heckler]

If state courts would actively prosecute the gun crimes on their books and have some nice stiff penalties to go with them the Feds wouldnt have to worry about them. More often than not they just use them to squeeze out plea bargains from hardened criminals.

If it is a federal crime to use a gun during the commision of a felony than you prosecute in federal court. Otherwise take the law off of the books.(like that will ever happen).I'd guess that this is part of some variation of Project Exile. If it puts hardened criminals behind bars for an extra 10 years we are all better off.

[Hardastarboard]

You hit a hot button, my friend. The Rodney King cops were f***ed in the a$$ by our government. Like the initial finding of the jury or not, the double jeopardy rule of the constitution was completely ignored by a politically correct Republican president.

[JAWs]

Wolf is not wrong, but can we really trust the Bay State to prosecute those crimes?

Of course, recalling the Bulger fiasco, the Feds' hands are not clean.

[Paleo Conservative]

You hit a hot button, my friend.

I try! It helps people remember me and my arguments.

[Mulder]

Conservatives should keep in mind that "gun prosecutions" are up 68% under Janet Ashcroft.

[breakem]

For future reference, take out the name of the state and the judge when you read the article. Think, what did they say and what do I believe, then respond. This will help. One last tip, just because an article is critical of some practice of the administration does not make it liberal. It's a big country out there and no one's perfect.

[heckler]

And if those prosecutions are of violent criminals or people selling guns en-masse to criminals I say GO Ashcroft. Under the Clinton administration there were virtually no procecutions of criminals who used guns to commit felonies or of convicted felons attempting to buy guns. They did every thing they could to make it harder for me to buy a gun but nothing to punish people that shouldnt have guns.(convicted armed robbers, rapists, murderers,drug trafficers, etc.)

Now if they are prosecuting trivial technical violations committed by otherwise law abiding citizens then they are due some criticism, but the more hard core criminals they prosecute for gun violations the better. Gun crime is the biggest hammer that the anti-gunners have to beat us over the head with.(which is why the Clintonistas did nothing to slow it down.)