'Cracking' the Code: Interpreting Sentence Reduction Requirements in Favor of Eligibility for Crack Cocaine Offenders Who Avoided a Mandatory Minimum for Their Substantial Assistance to Authorities

41 Pages Posted: 23 Jun 2014

Date Written: January - May 2014

Abstract

In 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act increased the quantities triggering mandatory minimums for crack cocaine offenses and directed the United States Sentencing Commission to make similar reductions to the crack cocaine guideline ranges. After the Commission made these changes retroactive, offenders sentenced in accordance with the previous scheme sought sentence reductions. Due to the circuits’ differing interpretations of the eligibility requirements for a reduction, offenders who avoided a mandatory minimum for their substantial assistance to authorities have been held both eligible and ineligible, though similarly situated. This Note argues that courts should consistently hold such offenders eligible because this interpretation comports with the text of the United States Sentencing Guidelines and furthers the policy goals behind the FSA, the Commission and the criminal justice system in general.

Keywords: fair sentencing act, crack cocaine, mandatory minimum, substantial assistance to authorities, sentencing

Suggested Citation

DiVita, Catherine, 'Cracking' the Code: Interpreting Sentence Reduction Requirements in Favor of Eligibility for Crack Cocaine Offenders Who Avoided a Mandatory Minimum for Their Substantial Assistance to Authorities (January - May 2014). Boston College Law Review, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2457552

Catherine DiVita (Contact Author)

Boston College Law Review ( email )

885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459-1163
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
38
Abstract Views
612
PlumX Metrics