Posted on 11/18/2004 3:23:03 PM PST by Former Military Chick
"To sentence Mr. Angelos to prison for essentially the rest of his life is unjust, cruel and even irrational," U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell said.
That said, however, Cassell said he had no choice but to follow the statutes and sentence 25-year-old Weldon Angelos to prison for more than half a century. But in doing so, he called on President Bush to commute Angelos' sentence to one more in line with his crime. The judge suggested 18 years and asked Congress to revisit the mandatory-minimum laws that required the term.
The sentence was handed down in front of a full courtroom of Angelos' family and friends, as well as legal observers, many of whom expected Cassell to declare unconstitutional the mandatory-minimum sentencing laws that governed Angelos' sentence.
Angelos' loved ones, including his wife and two young sons, were in tears upon hearing Cassell's decision. Defense attorney Jerome Mooney also expressed disappointment.
"We just saw the effect of a Congress concerned about their seats and re-election instead of justice," Mooney said, saying the harsh sentencing laws prove legislators are more concerned with being viewed as tough on crime rather than the imposition of fair punishments on criminal offenders.
To mandate a term that would keep the young father behind bars until he is 80 years old, Mooney said, is "unjust, and Congress should be ashamed of themselves."
Angelos, the founder of the Utah-based rap music label Extravagant Records, initially faced at least a 61 1/2-year sentence for the 16 criminal counts of which he was convicted in December. The bulk of that term — the 55 years imposed Tuesday — is based on just three firearms charges for carrying a gun during two drug sales and for keeping additional firearms at his Fort Union apartment.
Cassell imposed just one day for the additional 13 drug, firearm and money-laundering charges.
The case has garnered the attention of legal experts across the country, who have been following Cassell's moves since June, when he declared the federal sentencing guidelines unconstitutional in the case of a Utah man convicted of child pornography. That ruling came on the heels of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that called the constitutionality of the guidelines into question.
Mooney, joined by 29 former legal officials from across the nation, had asked Cassell to find that the onerous mandatory-minimum term in the Angelos case constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The defense also argued the firearm statute is not applied equally to all criminal defendants, a violation of Angelos' equal-protection rights.
And although Cassell appeared to agree with the defense on nearly every point, the judge, in a lengthy opinion released immediately following Tuesday's hearing, said his analysis failed to meet the legal threshold required to find a statute unconstitutional. Thus, he said, he was required to impose the "Draconian" prison sentence.
"Our constitutional system of government requires the court to follow the law, not its own personal views about what the law ought to be," the judge wrote.
Federal prosecutors have maintained throughout the case that Cassell had no choice but to impose the mandatory-minimum sentence. Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Lund argued Tuesday that lawmakers passed the firearms statute — which requires a five-year mandatory-minimum sentence for the first charge and a 25-year term for each count thereafter — with the clear intent to address the growing problem of mixing drugs and firearms.
Attorney Jerome Mooney talks to the media after his client Weldon Angelos was sentenced to prison, calling the virtually lifelong term unjust.
"Drugs and gun violence are an endemic problem in this country," Lund said. "There's a huge societal impact."
Angelos' sentence simply reinforces the message Congress intended and will serve as an important deterrent, Lund said.
"People who engage in armed violent crime or armed drug dealing are going to face very serious consequences," he said.
Critics of the legal mandate, however, question the fairness of a method that doesn't allow judges to tailor a sentence to fit a particular crime or criminal defendant.
"Judicial discretion has always been the heart and soul of the American justice system," said Monica Pratt, of the Washington D.C.-based organization Families Against Mandatory Minimums.
Margaret Plane, staff attorney for the Utah chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, agreed.
"That's why this case is such a great example," Plane said. "(Mandatory-minimum) laws apply without regard to the offense type, without regard to the particular offender. It's really kind of a one-size-fits-all approach, and that's not how our justice system should necessarily work."
Despite his ultimate finding, University of Utah law professor Erik Luna commended Cassell for addressing the matter at all.
"Judge Cassell did a very brave thing in even raising the issue," said Luna, an outspoken critic of federal sentencing laws. "We need to take this to the next level, which is to talk to the politicians. . . . I hope and pray some day that sanity will come back to the system."
---------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: awelling@desnews.com
"based on just three firearms charges for carrying a gun during two drug sales and for keeping additional firearms at his Fort Union apartment"
Here's my take:
First of all, obviously what the man did is wrong, and I think he deserves to serve some time.
However, if the three firearms charges are the result of the same, singularly ongoing investigation against the drug dealer (ie they have his place staked out and they are sending in undercover guys to buy drugs from him) I'd say that 80 years in the click in an excessive charge.
Consider: individual selling pot. keeps a gun on in the safe/stash box because of paranoia, has never had a problem but wants to make sure someone isn't going to do a home invasion or what-not since a number of people know who he is, what he is doing, and how much money he has there. Remember that pot makes you paranoid and overly cautious.
If he gets arrested out of the blue and brought up on charges that he was selling drugs, and had a firearm present for three transactions, and the weapon was never brandished or displayed but perhaps seen where the drugs were, then 80 years is absolutely ridiculous.
There are a number of migrating factors here. The age of the defendant and any criminal history is a big one. If he has three gun charges from three seperate previous charges, then 80 years makes perfect sense and I don't think that the system is incorrect. If you get busted, and then get busted again, and then get busted yet a third time, it's obvious you aren't the learning type. But if you get stuck with a three-weapons-charges-during-a-single-month-investigation where you don't have a previous criminal history and aren't brandishing a weapon and only selling minor amounts of pot, that's... harsh, man.
Other factors to consider - type of drugs sold, quanity of drugs sold, location where drugs are sold (close to school, etc), willingess to cooperate, etc. There's a ton of stuff that's unknown, and the devil is in the details here.
Sounds like it's time to get rid of the judge.WHACKO JUDGE
He was convicted on 16 criminal counts, and each count carried a penalty. Drug dealers with guns are the main weapon - for lack of a better word - the anti-gun lobby use to destroy the Second amendment. I don't feel sorry for "this young father". That young father should have thought of the consequences of his actions.
"That young father should have thought of the consequences
of his actions"
Amen and hallelujah!
"But judge, I didn't think I was going to get *caught*! =( "
I'm confused. Which is it that liberals want? Gun control laws with teeth, or light sentences for offenders?
This is Angelos‘ sentence, all right, 738 months. Remember, he was selling pot. A kingpin of a major drug trafficking ring where death resulted 293 months. Aircraft hijacker: 293 months. Second-degree murderer: 168 months. Kidnapper: 151 months. Rapist of a 10-year-old child: 135 months. A rapist: 87 months.
I agree. The rapist and murderer should either be executed or receive life without possiblity of parole. Would you be OK with the sentence then?
You are probably right on the ulterior motive of trying this case. The case obviously is a set-up for challenging the minimum sentencing laws. I went to law school with Jerome Mooney (then known as Jerry). He was smart, ambitious and savvy. I don't believe he hijacked the defendant without some strong belief that he would eventually exonerate this guy up the appeals line, and without the defendant's full agreement in the strategy.
The next step is the Court of Appeals and then on to the Supreme Court. That would be in keeping with the Jerry I knew but he is not the type to railroad his client just to make a name for himself.
Someone please explain to me how it is so bad for the children of a drug dealing gun toting thug to not have this guy for a father while they are growing up. Or how it's not better that the young police officers don't have to face his guns in 5 1/2 years?
Yes -- an attention getter. Things that make you say 'Hmmmmm'.
Other charges included possession of a stolen firearm, possession of a firearm while drug trafficking and three seperate counts of money laundering. He's a gangsta rappa. He sounds like a bad due who got caught, got what was coming to him on the criminal counts, and is trying to divert attention (and public sympathy) from his crimes to a vague b*tch about mandatory sentencing guidlines.
Yes, the fact that he was able to procreate clearly makes him a paragon of our society.
Certainly we should reap the rewards of allowing him to procreate some more and I just can't get enough of that Utah rap music. A great loss for all I'm sure.
This is Angelos‘ sentence, all right, 738 months. Remember, he was selling pot. A kingpin of a major drug trafficking ring where death resulted 293 months. Aircraft hijacker: 293 months. Second-degree murderer: 168 months. Kidnapper: 151 months. Rapist of a 10-year-old child: 135 months. A rapist: 87 months.
Here‘s the simple fact. 924 ©, the commission of a drug trafficking offense while armed. And this stems from the assassinations, believe it or not, of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King through the Crime Control Act of 1970 where legislatively it was determined, as you know, that drugs and guns go together, too frequently in our urban centers, and they are a violent, volatile combination.
When some bad guy steals your car stereo, you call your insurance company and in a couple of days, you receive a check and go buy a new stereo.
When some bad guy steals some tools from your garage, you call your insurance company and in a few days, you receive a check and go buy some news tools.
Even if you don't have insurance, you can save up and replace anything that the bad guys took or learn to live without this stuff.
A drug dealer, reaches into the soul of your child and steals its future. Calling your insurance company will be to no avail. You can save all the money that you want, you will never be able to get that child's future back. AND, try that you might, this is not something that you will just learn to live with.
So, for me.............lock them up and throw away the key. My attitude applies to more than drug dealers........3 time losers, rapists, Pedophiles, child abusers and so on.
Having said all of that, I have met a couple of people that went to prison for dealing drugs and when they got out, they changed their lives around. Unfortunately, these "turn arounds" are few and far between.
I appreciate your view point, thank you.
Actually no it isn't. It occured after my service by a drug seaking repeat offender who felt killing someone for their next fix was just part of the score.
Thank you, this does make for part of the discussion, throw away the key on the likes of the man in this article and not for others who rape, murder or worse?
I do care that he took a gun with him to do it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.