Posted on 12/13/2006 6:54:17 AM PST by FormerACLUmember
Remember the girl who received a five-day suspension for bringing Tylenol to school? If that punishment seems excessive, how about a 25-year prison sentence for having Tylenol at home?
In 2004 a Florida jury convicted Richard Paey of drug trafficking involving at least 28 grams of the narcotic painkiller oxycodone, which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years. But there was no evidence that Paey, who has suffered from severe chronic pain for two decades, planned to do anything with the pain reliever except relieve his pain. And since he was taking Percocet, a combination of oxycodone and acetaminophen, the over-the-counter analgesic accounted for 98 percent of the weight used to calculate his sentence.
This penalty is both cruel and unusual; first-time offenders charged with unauthorized possession of prescription drugs typically get probation. But last week Florida's 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that Paey's punishment is not "grossly disproportionate" enough to be considered "cruel and unusual" under the Eighth Amendment or even "cruel or unusual" under the state constitution. The court nevertheless made the rare gesture of urging Paey to seek clemency from the governor, who can commute his sentence to time served (three years) and should do so as a matter of basic decency.
Today Paey, a father of three who has multiple sclerosis and uses a wheelchair, receives morphine from a pump prescribed by a prison doctor. The drugs that led to his arrest in 1997 were the same ones his New Jersey doctor, Stephen Nurkiewicz, prescribed for the severe back pain that resulted from a 1985 car crash and the unsuccessful surgeries that followed: Percocet, the painkiller Lortab, and the muscle relaxant Valium.
After Paey and his family moved to Pasco County, Florida, in 1994, Nurkiewicz continued to treat him--a fact that highlights the difficulty pain patients have in finding doctors willing to prescribe adequate doses of narcotics. Paey said Nurkiewicz authorized all the prescriptions he filled in Florida. Nurkiewicz, who could have faced charges himself if he had backed up Paey's story, said he stopped treating Paey in December 1996.
At worst, then, Paey was guilty of fraudulently obtaining drugs for his own consumption, either to treat his pain (as he insisted) or to maintain an addiction he developed while treating his pain (as the prosecution suggested). There was no evidence he was selling the drugs or planned to do so.
But as the Florida appeals court explained, "a person need not sell anything to commit the ‘trafficking' offense"; all that's required is possession of at least four grams of "any mixture containing" oxycodone. Hence each of Paey's 100-pill Percocet prescriptions, weighing in at 33 grams, qualified him as a trafficker several times over. Each also qualified him for the 25-year mandatory minimum sentence.
The prosecutors have suggested Paey's real crime was not prescription fraud but his stubbornness in turning down plea bargains. "He made his own bed here as far as I'm concerned," said Bernie McCabe, Pasco County's state attorney, after the appeals court ruling. Even assuming defendants should be punished for insisting on their right to a trial, does 25 years seem like a fair penalty?
Calling Paey's punishment "illogical, absurd, unjust, and unconstitutional," a dissenting appeals court judge faulted the prosecution for abusing the law. "With no competent proof that [Paey] intended to do anything other than put the drugs into his own body for relief from his persistent and excruciating pain," he wrote, "the State chose to prosecute him and treat him as a trafficker in illegal drugs."
Outgoing Gov. Jeb Bush, whose own daughter was sentenced to probation and treatment for trying to obtain Xanax illegally, should recognize the senselessness of punishing someone who has never trafficked in drugs for drug trafficking. The appeals court said Paey's plea for justice "does not fall on deaf ears, but it falls on the wrong ears." Let's hope the right ears are not deaf.
"Actually 32 g. = 1.124 OUNCE. In drug terms, that is a bunch."
An average pill is around 800 mg. It would take 40 of these to equal 32g. Less than a bottle. While maybe a bunch in LEO drug terms, that isn't alot to a patient on chronic medication.
If the drug war were so successful, why do we still have such problems with addiction? Has the "war" really done any good?
I ask this as someone who has counseled addicts. I have seen myself that addiction causes misery to those it touches. But I I fail to see how society is served by the prosecution of a man who is afflicted with chronic pain. Can you explain it to me?
You're killing me with that thought, you rascal!
Despite what demagogues will tell you, in the vast majority of cases, judges impose appropriate sentences. If you'd like, encourage legislatures to suggest sentencing guidelines. But mandatory minimums inevitably lead to injustices. Judges are better at judging than legislatures
This case does not reflect well on the War on Drugs.
"The comment is preposterous. The war on "some drugs?" Which ones? Any potential meaning for the comment was lost right there. "
War on SOME drugs... I.E. the ones that someone you don't know, who has no interest whatsoever in your well being, nor any right whatsoever to speak for you, says you can't have. The same ones he can send armed thugs with guns to kick your door in in the middle of the night if he *suspects* you might have.
And not the "other" ones that the aforementioned high and might beurocrat says it's okay for you to have, in his infinite generosity. You can buy a bottle of gin, or get a presription for SSRI's that might help or might make your teenager commit suicide, but can't have anything that actually makes you feel better.
God, I despise drug warriors.... I despise them as much as communists, and view them as just as much of a threat to freedom. I can't even say I feel sorry for them when they get shot down kicking their way into some innocent person's home, and I'm not sure how I feel about myself having those feelings. I hate to see people get hurt, but it's getting to the point with me where, when you are attacked, you have a duty to defend yourself. DEA agents are criminals operating under the color of law, they should be taken down by RICO.
(And for the record no I don't do drugs.. I don't even drink... nothing.. in case that's what you were thinking)
All research on successful drug policy shows that treatment should be increased and law enforcement decreased while abolishing mandatory minimum sentences. Of course, facts, logic, & reason have no place in a debate with the hysterical drug zealots & their desperate, single-minded crusade to punish people.
Probably because of the "buying" part of the equation. That said, in this case the DA was completely out of line to prosecute this.
That's too bad. At least then you'd have an excuse.
Amen Brother, but there are those on this forum who would say this guy is still criminal and deserves what he got.
Yes, the overriding dictum then was "Play the game! Play the game!" In a different kind of case, but one using the same twists of illogic, he would probably also be judged as "not showing enough remorse", which the benign option of plea-bargaining is supposed to substitute for.
Yes, the overriding dictum then was "Play the game! Play the game!" In a different kind of case, but one using the same twists of illogic, he would probably also be judged as "not showing enough remorse", which the benign option of plea-bargaining is supposed to substitute for.
Thanks again, War on Some Drugs!
I haven't looked at the thread yet, but think I can safely predict there will be keyboard commando drug warriors here saying he got what he deserved.
Rush SHOULD take up the guy's cause, but he won't. Probably not too wise to do it "O'Reilly style" as a personal crusade against a judge/jury, and it's not Rush's style anyway. It IS O'R's style, but the only cases he seems to handle are the child molester or abuser types.
I despise drugs and people who abuse them. I don't even drink beer any more.
However, I did work as a chemist for a dozen years for a company called Mallinckrodt, Inc., in St. Louis, Missouri during the eighties and nineties.
At the time, Mallinckrodt was one of only two manufacturers of bulk narcotics (codeine, morphine, oxycodone, cocaine hydrochloride, fentanyl, etc.), and the other manufacturer was insignificantly small. All dosage-form manufacturers obtained their bulk ingredients from one of these two companies.
During this period of time, Mallinckrodt quadrupled prices each year. I repeat: each year for the twelve years I was there, Mallinckrodt increased prices by 400%.
The war on some drugs is one of the many reasons that medical costs are completely out of control.
Since you are such an avid supporter of the war on some drugs, I hope that someday you are bankrupted by the cost of drugs required to keep you alive. It would only be justice.
Sorry, dude, Bones75 has someone else in his corner, ME!
Reading his post was like reading me. GMTA.
Sorry, dude, Bones75 has someone else in his corner, ME!
Reading his post was like reading me. GMTA.
Yes, but even given all that, why put away a guy in a wheelchair for 25 years, when all he apparently did was to acquire a small amount of pain pills without a scrip. What exactly was the motivation of the DA's office here? To show everyone who's the boss, or was it just a show of naked aggression? Maybe there's something to the story we don't know, but so far I don't get 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.