Table of Contents - American Bar Association

One of the ABA’s sentencing priorities is the elimination of mandatory minimum sentencing.
Congress directed the United States Sentencing Commission to prepare a report on mandatory
minimums and to make recommendations. In May, the Commission held a hearing on this
issue at which committee Co‐Chair Jim Felman testified. During the upcoming year, the
committee plans to use the opportunities presented by the Commission’s report to advance the
ABA’s existing policy regarding mandatory minimums.
An additional priority of the committee has been to urge the Sentencing Commission to make
greater use of alternatives to imprisonment. This past year, the Commission promulgated
proposed amendments to expand alternatives and our committee submitted written comments
supporting the amendment and Jim Felman testified before the Commission. The Commission,
in fact, passed the amendment and it is scheduled to go into effect on November 1, 2010.
In addition, the committee organized the Second Annual Sentencing Advocacy, Practice and
Reform Institute with Special Focus on Reentry which was held on November 6, 2009 in
Washington, D.C. The seminar featured some of the most well‐known reentry and sentencing
experts in the country, such as John Jay College of Criminal Justice President Jeremy Travis and
Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben. The program was a success with over two hundred
attendees, and the Committee will assist with the Third Annual program which will be held in
conjunction with the Fall Council meeting in Washington D.C. This year’s program will include
a Criminal Justice Legal Educators Colloquium.
Last year, the committee provided comments and perspectives to the DOJ on its charging and
sentencing practices. In May, Attorney General Holder released a memorandum outlining new
charging and sentencing policies for U.S. Attorney Offices. We hope to monitor the
implementation of these new policies and provide feedback to the sentencing community on the
specific changes that have been brought about.
Finally, the committee continues its efforts to achieve procedural reform in the federal
sentencing process. The committee has developed policy which was approved by the House of
Delegates to amend Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 to ensure that both the government
and the defense have an opportunity to review the information to be considered by the
sentencing court in determining the appropriate punishment. During the upcoming year, we
plan to continue our efforts to encourage the Rules Committee to adopt this amendment.
SPECIALIZED PRACTICE DIVISION
Division Co‐Directors: Cheryl Jacobs and Bruce Zagaris
Amicus Practice Committee
Co‐Chairs: Terence Anderson and Rory Little
Abbott v. U.S.
In May 2010, the ABA filed an amicus brief supporting petitioners in Abbott v. U.S. (09‐479) and
Gould v. U.S. (09‐7073), cases involving the potential « layering » of mandatory minimum
sentences. The brief had been recommended by the Section and was drafted by Jeffrey Lamkin
and Edward Daniels at MoloLamkin, with the assistance of Margaret Love. It may be viewed
at: www.abanet.org/amicus/briefs/kevin_abbott_carlos_rashad_gould_v_united_states.pdf.
Flournoy v. Georgia: While the ABA rarely files amicus briefs in state supreme courts, upon
recommendation of Amicus Committee Co‐Chair Rory Little, the Executive Committee decided
in May to file an application for a brief in the right‐to‐counsel case Flournoy v. Georgia that had
been appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court. Last December, plaintiffs had filed a class action
ABA Criminal Justice Section Annual Report 2009-2010 34