At our precinct caucus last week several citizens voiced there displeasure with Representative Ellison's defense of drug dealers and other criminals. I have however
found Representative Ellison's work as a defense lawyer defensible because I believe every accused deserves effective legal representation. However, this bill is essentially a mass plea bargain for Representative Ellison's drug dealing clients. I haven't read up on the ethical code for attorneys lately, but IIRC it is considered improper for an attorney to misuse there position (in the legislature) to obtain legal favors for his clients.
Representative Ellison would be well advised to remember that his real clients are his constituents. The 58th district endorsing convention is march 20th, and we DFLers of Representative Ellison's district don't have to endorse him. I suspect the mild disagreement with Representative Ellison's defense of various and sundry drug dealers will turn into a lost endorsement if he doesn't quickly pull his sponsorship of this pro drug bill. We have plenty of qualified candidates for the job of State Representative if Mr. Ellison chooses to represent drug dealers instead of the good citizens of North Minneapolis.
preparing for the onslaught of drug dealers in Hawthorne,
Dyna Sluyter
On Tuesday, March 9, 2004, at 03:28 PM, Barbara Lickness wrote:
I NEED TO GET THE WORD OUT
For many years drug crimes, have harmed neighborhoods and destroyed citizens� sense of safety and well being. To take back their neighborhoods, many Minneapolis citizens have worked individually and in community groups. Through citizens patrols, community impact statements, court watches, partnerships with law enforcement and other efforts, citizens have regained some of the quality of life they desire for themselves and the neighborhood children. They have begun making the criminal justice system understand that drug crimes, and all the destruction that accompanies them, are not victimless crimes. Through extensive and persistent efforts, citizens have made progress in getting the system to hold drug offenders more accountable for their activities. In many cases, the courts have responded and removed the most severe offenders from the community by incarceration. Now this progress is threatened.
H.F. 1829 which is being heard on March 11, 2004 at 5 pm in the House Judiciary Finance and Policy Committee would vastly reduce penalties for drug crimes. Among other things, the bill would:
1. Increase the amount of cocaine that a person would have to sell to be charged with a first-degree sale from 10 grams to 50 grams. (Police estimates are that 50 grams have a retail street value of $10,000�based on being made into crack)
2. Increase the amount of cocaine that a person would have to possess to be charged with first degree possession from 25 grams to 250 grams(Police estimates are that 250 grams would have a street retail value of $50,000�based on being made into crack)
3. Decrease the presumptive penalty for methamphetamine manufacture from 86 months in prison to 48 months;
4. Reduce penalties for sale in a park, school, public housing zones or drug treatment facilities. Currently if someone sells any amount of cocaine, methamphetamine or heroin in one of these zones, it would be a second-degree charge, calling for a presumptive 48-month prison sentence. The bill would make the penalty a probationary level offense.
5. Reduce penalties for using a minor to sell drugs, or selling drugs to a minor, from second degree carrying a 48 month prison sentence, to third degree, which calls for probation.
6. Eliminate much of the court�s discretion in handling low-level cases. As the bill is now written, it seems to require either the defendant to go to treatment or to prison. If literally enforced, this provision has the potential for adding even more low level people to prison with fewer rehabilitative opportunities.
Part of the justification used for this legislation comes from the Sentencing Guidelines Commission Report, which stated that the Minnesota prison system is filled with �non-violent� drug offenders. The Report leaves the impression that many low level addicts are sent to prison without the opportunity for treatment; that these are non-violent individuals who are taking up prison space better used for more violent criminals.
A review of the report makes it clear that the large increase in drug prison sentences in recent years comes not from the metropolitan area, but from Greater Minnesota which is now struggling with a burgeoning methamphetamine problem. Much of the increase in prison population comes from Greater Minnesota commitments for first degree methamphetamine possession, sale and manufacture as that part of the State struggles with a serious, new problem
The report also indicates that there is a large population of fifth degree drug (the lowest level) offenders in prison. It is important to note however, that the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines provide probationary sentences for such offenders unless they have extremely long criminal histories (several past felony offenses) or have failed at probation.
In Hennepin County Drug Court, for example, the average disposition for a fifth degree drug offense is diversion, which generally involves attendance at treatment (if the evaluation recommends it) and possibly attendance at some other rehabilitative programming. Successful completion of diversion leaves the individual with no criminal record whatsoever. Likewise, in Hennepin County Drug Court, those who are on probation for any drug offense are given multiple opportunities at treatment and are only revoked to prison if there is a long history of non-compliance.
The bill�s proponents argue that it would save dollars at the State level from the Department of Corrections budget. If the bill�s reduced penalties make Minnesota a more lucrative market for drug entrepreneurs from states with more severe penalties, if the bill�s reduced penalties for sales in park, school and public housing zones reduces the cost of doing business for drug dealers, much of the fragile progress communities have made will be lost. Dollars saved at the State level may well be paid out by struggling urban communities in particular.
REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
