 |
|
|
|
|
|
DENVER -- Nine former U.S. attorneys in Oklahoma this week criticized a prison sentence imposed under controversial federal laws that mandate minimum prison terms. They are among 163 former federal judges, attorneys general and prosecutors across the nation who submitted a "friend of the court" brief to the U.S. appeals court in Denver. While in office, those officials were sworn to uphold the laws used to impose the sentence they now challenge. The brief argues that a 55-year mandatory sentence imposed on a 24-year-old first-time offender in Utah is so "grossly disproportionate" to the crime that the sentence is unconstitutional because it is "cruel and unusual." Weldon Angelos, a rap producer who turned down a 16-year plea bargain, was convicted of carrying a gun under his clothing while selling several hundred dollars worth of marijuana on two occasions and for owning several other guns. It was the gun circumstances, added to the drug selling, that triggered the mandatory prison term. The judge in Salt Lake City who imposed the sentence described it as "cruel, unjust and irrational," but said his hands were tied by the "mandatory minimum" laws. Prosecutor Robert Lunt said Angelos has been suspected of drug trafficking and money laundering for years and got what he deserved. The mandatory minimum laws are controversial because they do not allow judges to consider mitigating circumstances. By contrast, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said earlier last week that some judges are imposing light sentences on too many criminals. The former U.S. attorneys in Oklahoma who are opposing the mandatory minimum in the Utah case are:
Contributing: The Associated Press |
|
|
 |
