--- Michael Pollak <mpollak at panix.com> wrote:
>
> The articles about Kozlowski's convictions spend a
> lot of time discussing
> the difference between being convicted in a state
> court like him -- where he
> got 8 to 25 -- and getting convicting in a Federal
> prison, where Ebbers got
> 25 -- with (it seems to be implied) no option to get
> out earlier. (They all
> add that this may not be the boon it seems, since in
> NYS, all sentences over
> 6 years end you up in a maximum security prison with
> murderers and such,
> where in Federal prison, white collar criminals have
> their own jails that
> aren't as onerous.)
>
> So first question: do federal sentences not come
> with ranges? I thought all
> sentences had ranges. I thought you only got a 25
> minimum on a sentence of
> 25 to life.
There is a complicated set of Federal Sentencing Guidelines that (formerly) determined federal sentencing. You literally had a grid, plug in the offence, tick up the aggravating factors) (priors, amount of loss or drugs, etc.) and mitigating factors (narrow permitted list), and it would give you a range of months. A judge could depart upwards or downwards only on certain narrow bases and downward departures often guaranteed appeals by the govt. last term the S.Ct made the Guidelines advisory for all practical purposes, but I think most judges still pretty much follow them.
Btw, there is no parole in the federal system, just good time. So it's not true that federal prisoners always serve their full sentences -- generally they serve maybe, what 3/4? if they are well behaved. Some state systems, like Illinois, have now also abolished parole and switched to good time.
In the federal system, you could get 300 months (25 years) for lots of things, more lately, since Congress upped the limits on white collar crime. Used to be you could only get 5 yerars for a mail fraud conviction, now you can get 30.
I don't know about NY, but it would surprise me if all sentences over six years get you put in a maximum security prison. Usually in any prison system which prison you end up in depends on (a) your crime, i.e., whether it was violent (drug crimes are per se violent in the federal system), (b) your conduct -- nice, well-behaved prisoners get sent to better prisons, violent types who fight, political activists, trouble-makers, and people who annoy the warden get sent to tougher joints. AT least that is the way it is in Illinois. Also there are (c) resources -- they may put you ina lower security preison than they think you belomng if they lack the space. Or vice versa.
>
> Second question: does anyone know why Kozlowski was
> tried in state court and
> the others in federal? Are decisions like that just
> a matter of who gets
> there first?
>
Yup. And if the feds want you, they'll take you. Moreover, though you can't be convicted of the same crime in both systemns, you can be convicted of slightly different crimes for essentially the same activity in each system. It's not double jeopardy as long as the elements of the crimes differ. So both the feds and the state can get you at the same time.
jks
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com