Aug 8, 2017 | Blog, News
Pontiac — The state agency that oversees Michigan’s courts plans to investigate how local officials handle search warrants after paperwork came up missing in the case of an accused Oakland County drug dealer.
Christopher Khalil Dukes, 34, of Rochester Hills, was granted a mistrial this spring on a charge of possession with intent to deliver 450-1,000 grams of heroin after prosecutors, police and court officials were unable to produce a warrant authorizing the placement of a mobile tracking device on his car.
Prior to trial, investigators had not disclosed the existence of the device, as required by law.
Information gained from the tracker was used to obtain a warrant in August 2015 authorizing police to search Dukes’ apartment, where they found a kilogram of heroin with a street value of up to $300,000, cash and guns.
Authorities have said the warrant authorizing the tracker was misplaced, but Dukes’ attorney has questioned whether the document ever existed in the first place.
In a recent hearing, 50th District Judge Ronda Fowlkes Gross, who reportedly approved the warrant, testified her court does not keep records or copies of search warrants signed by judges — nor is that required by law.
Asked about the judge’s statement, John Nevin, a spokesman for the Michigan State Court Administrative Office, said that according to case file management standards, the court should keep search warrants stored in an annual group file by date of issuance.
Nevin said the office’s regional administrator “will be looking into the issue.”
Asked whether the office’s inquiry would be focused on Oakland County, Nevin replied, “Certainly start in Oakland and then investigating if it’s a problem elsewhere.”
The controversy over the missing search warrant led the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office to change how it stores search warrants and supporting documents.
Undersheriff Michael McCabe said following the Dukes mistrial, the department began scanning search warrants and affidavits into a digital file that’s included with every case file.
“We always had and continue to have a hard copy file,” McCabe said. “We just felt it was a good practice to have a digital file in the event a record could not be found for any reason.”
In Dukes’ case, attorney James W. Amberg obtained a mistrial on the first day of trial after cross examination of a detective revealed the GPS tracking device — a legal tool used by law enforcement officers — had been secretly placed on Dukes’ 2015 Cadillac.
In subsequent efforts, Amberg determined no one had a copy of the search warrant authorizing placement of the GPS device.
After weeks of searching at five possible locations, Detective Charles Janczarek, the lead investigator, found a signed affidavit for the tracker warrant in a milk crate in his basement.
Amberg contends there is no evidence that Janczarek and the Oakland County Narcotics Enforcement Team ever properly obtained the initial warrant.
He said that means the second warrant for the apartment — which relied partly on the tracking device information as probable cause to search the residence — was deficient and any evidence obtained through it should not be permitted at trial.
NET officers said Dukes’ activities — monitored for 30 days through the tracker — supported the request for a second warrant to search his apartment, where the drugs were found.
Investigators also had focused on Dukes based on an unnamed “reliable confidential informant,” who told officers Dukes was distributing cocaine throughout Oakland County.
Dukes had been linked with six active DEA investigations, according to Janczarek’s warrant affidavit, and had been monitored in “short term traffic/meeting indicative of narcotics transactions” over 10 times in Oakland and Wayne counties in a 30-day period.
Amberg slammed authorities’ handling of the case in a legal brief submitted to Judge Rae Lee Chabot of Oakland County Circuit Court.
“This case is extremely disturbing,” Amberg wrote to Chabot after a two-day hearing in June. “The Oakland County Narcotics Unit is allowed by the Prosecutor’s Office and judges of Oakland County to operate completely in secret, giving those individuals who are subject to their police-state tactics no ability to challenge their investigations.”
Chabot heard testimony from seven witnesses, including assistant county prosecutor Beth Hand, who supervises drug unit cases, and Gross.
The assistant prosecutor in the Dukes case, Shannon O’Brien, declined to comment to The News.
But in legal motions filed July 25, O’Brien said a “preponderance of the evidence at the hearing supports a finding that the GPS tracker search warrant existed, but is lost. There is no evidence of any perpetration of fraud in the production of the GPS tracker affidavit; Defendant’s accusations in that regard are wholly without merit.”
Chabot will consider the testimony, legal briefs and possibly additional verbal arguments before the case moves forward but the testimony to date offers some insight on how investigations and search warrants are handled. Among them:
■Janczarek said he remembered filing the search warrants for the tracker and the apartment search in court and giving copies of both to Hand.
■Janczarek said he recalled storing information, including his original draft for the tracking device warrant, on a computer “memory stick,” which also has disappeared.
■Gross testified she recalled conversations with Janczarek about the tracker warrant.
■Janczarek’s supervisor, Detective Sgt. Douglas Stewart, testified officers purposely do not write reports or keep notes of their ongoing investigations.
■Hand, who made the charging decision in the case, testified no GPS tracker search warrant or affidavit was submitted to her.
In filings to Chabot, Amberg said that in his dealings with the FBI, DEA and Homeland Security in narcotics cases, the federal agencies all kept “detailed reports for every single thing they do in furthering of investigations.”
“If this had happened in federal court, the ax would come down hard,” Amberg told Chabot when arguing for a mistrial in March.
Amberg characterized Gross’ testimony in June as “either untruthful” or her knowledge of warrant processing “astonishingly poor.”
He noted that Janczarek had copies of a warrant seeking suppression of the tracking device warrant. That, Amberg said, raised a question: If records aren’t kept, why would there be a need to seek to have them suppressed?
This is not the first time allegations have been raised regarding information placed on a search warrant by an NET officer. In 2013 Sgt. Marc Ferguson was fired when it was revealed he had lied on affidavits and committed perjury in 2011 to obtain a search warrant on a package containing 78 pounds of marijuana he had already opened at a Pontiac shipping company.
The prosecutor’s office subsequently dismissed 17 cases involving Ferguson as a chief witness.
Mike Martindale, The Detroit News Published 12:04 a.m. ET Aug. 7, 2017
Previous Article – March 2017
Aug 8, 2017 | Blog, News
Pontiac— A mistrial was declared in the case of an accused Rochester Hills drug dealer this month after it was disclosed his defense attorney never received pretrial information about a mobile tracking device placed on his client’s vehicle by investigators.
Christopher Khalil Dukes, 34, is charged in Oakland Circuit Court with possession with intent to deliver 450 to 1,000 grams of heroin, a felony that carries a 30-year prison sentence. He remains free on $150,000 bond pending a retrial set for June 19.
But still in dispute — and possibly to be addressed at a pretrial hearing Tuesday — is whether the tracker that monitored his movements was legally attached to Dukes’ 2015 Cadillac. Officials have been unable to locate the original search warrant reportedly obtained from a Pontiac district judge by Detective Charles Janczarek, a member of the Oakland County Narcotics Enforcement Team.
Defense attorneys and civil right advocates said the case underscores concerns about the potential for abuse of GPS trackers by law enforcement and the need for proper search warrants.
Dukes’ attorney, James W. Amberg, said if authorities can’t prove the Cadillac was legally tracked, it would impact a subsequent search warrant for Dukes’ Rochester Hills apartment, where NET investigators arrested him in August 2015 and seized a kilogram of heroin, drug packaging materials, cash and guns. (Photo: Daniel Mears / The Detroit News)
Dukes’ attorney, James W. Amberg, said if authorities can’t prove the Cadillac was legally tracked, it would impact a subsequent search warrant for Dukes’ Rochester Hills apartment, where NET investigators arrested him in August 2015 and seized a kilogram of heroin, drug packaging materials, cash and guns.
“The apartment warrant was obtained based on information that the tracking device had established suspected drug sales activity,” Amberg told Oakland Circuit Judge Rae Lee Chabot at a March 8 hearing after Janczarek disclosed under cross-examination that a mobile tracker and a telephone tracking app had been used to monitor Dukes’ movements.
“If that information was false, then the second warrant was improper and the argument can be made that it has to be thrown out, along with any evidence obtained with it,” Amberg said.
At the hearing, assistant prosecutor Shannon O’Brien said efforts would be made to find the elusive warrant but it “may be just a miscommunication on a document in a very long-term case.”
Amberg told Chabot he did not think the warrant existed: “If this happened in federal court, the ax would come down hard,” he said.
“This may be the most serious issue I have ever encountered during a trial,” Chabot said as she granted Amberg’s request for a mistrial.
Pros and cons of trackers
Trackers are commonly used on vehicles suspected in criminal activity, but police must first obtain a search warrant from a magistrate or judge, just as they do to search a home or office. Officers swear on an affidavit why the tracking device is needed, supported by information about active or past criminal investigations, informant and witness statements, and other evidence.
The affidavit request in the Dukes case — which includes the above elements — has been found, but not the warrant itself.
Paul Walton, Oakland County’s chief deputy prosecutor, said NET officers “are checking 50th District Court files to locate the missing search warrant.”
“We expect they will be able to locate it,” Walton said. “That court handles a lot of paperwork, and it is possible that it was mislaid.”
Oakland County Undersheriff Michael McCabe said Judge Ronda Fowlkes Gross of 50th District Court approved using the vehicle tracker. “This is a paperwork snafu of some sort. We have the affidavit signed by Judge Gross authorizing the tracking device, which is signed at the same time as the warrant.”
McCabe said investigators personally surveilled Dukes for 30 days before seeking a warrant for the GPS device.
“The only thing that is missing is the first page, the actual warrant,” McCabe said. “We don’t know if it was misplaced or lost or what happened to it. But we are 100 percent confident that we had a valid warrant and that this is a solid case and we expect a conviction.”
Legal experts and others who follow such cases say tracking devices are powerful tools for catching criminals but that safeguards are needed to protect suspects’ rights and ensure that warrant requests are accurate and accessible.
David Moran, a University of Michigan law professor, said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that police must obtain a search warrant to use tracking devices or risk violating the 4th Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. He questioned why the warrant authorizing the search of Dukes’ home included no mention of the tracking device.
“It surprises me if they didn’t note that (tracking device was used) in the subsequent warrant to search the apartment,” said Moran. “It smells bad.”
“It doesn’t sound right,” said Nathan Wessler, an ACLU attorney in New York who specializes in technology used in searches. “You have to have a warrant to put a tracking device on a vehicle. We’ve known that since 2012.”
Problems with warrants have led to other Oakland County cases being dismissed.
Last month, Circuit Judge Denise Langford Morris dismissed a marijuana dispensary case, finding there had not been probable cause to search warehouses in Waterford and Lake Orion in February 2016, though NET officers had obtained warrants signed by judges; the Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office is appealing Morris’ ruling.
In 2013, an NET officer, Sgt. Marc Ferguson, was fired for lying two years earlier to obtain a warrant to search a Pontiac shipping company where he had already opened a package of 78 pounds of marijuana. The incident led prosecutors to seek the dismissal of 17 cases in which Ferguson was a chief witness, including the charges against the recipient of the marijuana, Anastacio Payan of California.
“In 26 years, I’ve never seen a search warrant denied,” said Payan’s attorney, James L. Galen Jr. “Sometimes I think this is all about forfeitures and going after property rather than criminals.”
Walton said an assistant prosecutor brought the Payan incident to light after a witness told her what Ferguson had done.
Informants and surveillance
On Aug. 18, 2015, Janczarek waited for Dukes to arrive at an apartment on Waterford Court in the gated River Oaks complex. After Dukes parked in the apartment’s carport, Janczarek produced a warrant to search the home.
According to a warrant return and court testimony, NET officers didn’t have to go far. Concealed in the bottom of a black soft cooler in the foyer was a “brick” of heroin weighing 878 grams. Six “corner ties” containing 61.8 grams also were found.
The drugs, depending on how they were cut with other materials, had a street value of $95,000 to $300,000, according to the sheriff’s office.
A bedroom closet had a pair of jeans containing $400; a pair of cargo pants containing $6,000 and a second pair of cargo pants containing $16,000. A .45-caliber Smith & Wesson handgun and ammunition were found on a stack of clothes. A .9-mm Walther was found in the glovebox of Dukes’ Cadillac.
Dukes is licensed and has a permit to carry a concealed handgun, court records state.
In Janczarek’s affidavit, he said a “credible and reliable” informant told him Dukes was distributing cocaine countywide, using his Cadillac. Janczarek also noted a police database showed Bloomfield Township police had arrested Dukes for possession with intent to deliver marijuana and felony firearm.
Amberg pointed out in court filings that Janczarek incorrectly reported in his August 2015 warrant request to search Dukes’ apartment that the Bloomfield arrest occurred in November 2015 — which would have put it three months in the future, a mistake overlooked by the prosecutor’s office and the judge.
Rather, the Bloomfield arrest occurred in January 2007 and the case was dismissed in 2008.
After learning in court about the tracker on his client’s car, Amberg said Janczarek’s credibility and the “integrity” of the informant were under question because of a similar October 2015 case. In that instance, Janczarek obtained a search warrant on a drug suspect, Demario Williamson, after making an inaccurate statement to a different judge that an informant’s help had led to an earlier search warrant.
According to the court record, there was no other search warrant connected to the informant in the case against Williamson, who was charged with possession of 50 to 449 grams of cocaine.
Assistant prosecutor Beth Hand brought the concern over Janczarek’s statement to Judge Leo Bowman, who found the officer had made an “honest mistake” and hadn’t tried to mislead the court.
Williamson’s attorney, Paul J. Stablein, unsuccessfully argued since the warrant contained a false statement, any evidence it led to should have been barred at trial. Williamson, who was found guilty and given 20 to 60 years in prison, is appealing his sentence.
mmartindale@detroitnews.com
Follow Up Article – August 7, 2017
Aug 5, 2017 | Blog, News
Detroit — The former head of the St. Clair Housing Commission embezzled more than $336,000 in low-income housing funds and spent the cash on booze, beauty products, bedroom furniture and homes for her family, federal prosecutors said Monday.
Former Executive Director Lorena Loren, 55, was charged in federal court with conspiracy to commit federal program fraud during an eight-year scheme that benefited and involved relatives, including her husband and son, according to federal court records.
Since 2008, Loren fraudulently used the housing commission’s credit cards to make $166,000 worth of purchases at Amazon, Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club, falsified lease agreements for low-income housing and used the money to pay for her own relatives’ homes, the government alleged.
“Holy crap,” St. Clair Mayor Bill Cedar Jr. told The Detroit News. “I guess you never know what’s going on with people.”
Loren was charged in a criminal information, which means a guilty plea is expected. She could not be reached immediately for comment Monday.
If convicted, Loren could face at least five years in federal prison.
Loren was charged one year after she retired abruptly, the mayor said. She moved to southeast Georgia and bought a $325,000 custom-built house in October, according to public records.
The home is far from low-income housing. The five-bedroom, 2,858-square-foot home features a salt-water pool, 24-foot ceilings, walk-in closets, a game room and detached man cave.
Loren was appointed executive director in 2003 and started stealing from the poor five years later, prosecutors alleged.
She fraudulently obtained housing-assistance payments for properties in which she had a proprietary interest with family members or for the benefit of family members, according to court records.
She falsified lease agreements and money intended to help low-income residents afford apartments was used to rent a home for her son, Ryan Loren, prosecutors alleged.
Lorena Loren also told relatives to establish bank accounts so federal subsidy payments could be deposited and spent for their personal use, including to rent a home in Florida, according to court records.
She lied while claiming her son-in-law was the landlord of a rental property for low-income residents, prosecutors alleged. The property turned out to be Lorena Loren’s home in Port Austin, Michigan, according to court records.
Her son-in-law, Jaime Johnson, deposited the money into a bank account he controlled with Lorena Loren’s husband, Brian, the government alleged.
The $166,000 worth of credit card purchases included adult and infant clothing, furniture, appliances, mattresses, food, beauty supplies, medications and other household items, according to court records.
The money was supposed to maintain Palmer Park Manor, the commission’s low-income public housing facility, prosecutors alleged.
rsnell@detroitnews.com
(313) 222-2486
Twitter: @robertsnellnews
Aug 4, 2017 | Blog, Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, News
Detroit — It’s been a year since Detroit put laws in place to regulate medical marijuana shops and as of today, only two have been approved to operate.
The strict set of zoning and licensing requirements adopted in 2015 by the City Council went into effect last March. That’s when all shops — existing and new — seeking to operate lawfully were required to apply online, submit plans, meet rules and obtain licensing, or face closure.
The city has received more than 260 applications for Medical Marijuana Caregiver Centers since that time. But new figures released by the city this week reveal only two prospective centers cleared the required hurdles.
Green Cross on West Eight Mile opened in mid-February as Detroit’s first licensed center. Its operators were the first to apply under the new law and completed the “vigorous” process Feb. 3, said manager Simon Berro.
“We went to the city. We listened to what they said. We followed their rules,” said Berro of the center, operated by the Detroit Caregivers Center Association. “We took all precautions, and it was a vigorous process, but nonetheless, it worked out at the end.”
The Green Genie on McNichols on the city’s west side also has its license. The building and its signage indicate the facility is open, but no staff was there Thursday afternoon.
Meanwhile, 136 shops have been closed down, padlocked and sealed with bright orange stickers by the city’s Building Safety Engineering & Environmental Department. And 115 others remain in various stages of the application process, according to the building department, which has enforcement authority under the code.
“There’s a lot of growing pains that exist,” said Jamaine Dickens, a spokesman for Top Dollar Holdings, which operates a caregiver center, 420 Dank on Gratiot. “It’s been a learning experience for all involved from the city and most certainly from the industry.”
The center, Dickens said, had been in operation prior to the ordinances and has done everything “by the letter of the law.” Top Dollar Holdings is one of only a few operators so far granted a variance by the city’s zoning board after it was deemed too close to a church and liquor store. Its center is now working to obtain its business license, Dickens said.
The rules, aimed at bringing order to what had been an unregulated practice, have cleared the way for Detroit to shut down so-called pot shops failing to seek compliance under the ordinance or dispensing medical marijuana in zones prohibited under federal, state and city statutes.
The federal Drug Free School Zone Act prevents marijuana from being delivered, sold or manufactured within 1,000 feet of a school. State law also factors libraries into the rule. The city’s zoning regulations cover educational institutions and goes beyond that, prohibiting shops from operating near child care centers, arcades and outdoor recreation facilities.
There were 283 dispensaries throughout the city when Detroit began accepting applications under the new laws on March 1, 2016.
Detroit Corporation Counsel Melvin Butch Hollowell said each was sent a letter, warning they were “operating at their own risk” until fully licensed. The shops were also provided a 30-day window to submit applications before enforcement officially began.
Hollowell and the zoning code note shops in operation prior to the laws without licenses are able to continue serving patients so long as they have put in “good faith” applications. The operators who haven’t top a priority list for closure, Hollowell said.
Some medical marijuana advocates contend the city’s zoning laws are unfairly restrictive and applications are being processed too slowly, and they fear patients will suffer.
Robin Schneider, executive director of the National Patient Rights Association, said she’s disappointed with the lack of progress a year in.
“(Detroit) has the most exclusionary zoning practices of anything I’ve ever seen in the state,” said Schneider, who is concerned some applicants have been improperly turned down because they are located near long-closed former schools or child care buildings. “I think the fact that patients still do not have access to licensed facilities is a disservice to patients.”
The zoning legislation will permit about 50 shops overall. Still, Hollowell doesn’t think it will lead to hardships.
“There will be an appropriate number of locations that will be made available for people to sell the medicine,” he said. “We just want to make sure that as they are opened, they are opening in an orderly fashion and meeting needs of patients required for treatment.”
Hollowell added the small number of shops to complete the approvals so far shows “diligence” in the stringent requests for zoning, site and security planning, tax and health code clearances and licensing.
“It’s a new field,” he said. “It’s being processed well.”
Under the code, centers must operate in heavily commercial or industrial areas and are barred from locating in neighborhoods.
That’s welcomed by by Cortez York, who lives off Eight Mile on the city’s east side where centers along the main roadway have been plentiful. The 24-year-old said the marijuana centers “bring a lot of activity.”
Some of it has subsided since the city’s new laws have gone into place, he said.
“Some of them are taking the signs away. I see less cars pulling up all day and pulling out,” he added. “The neighborhood looks more peaceful.”
Hollowell said a mix of about 150 newer and older shops operating in Detroit are still facing closure because they haven’t made bids to legally operate. The city’s Law Department on Thursday said it estimates another 70-80 shops with applications pending are also operating.
About 80 others have been shuttered by neighborhood police officer and building inspector enforcement teams, and 55 closed after Detroit’s legal department filed nuisance abatement lawsuits in Wayne County Circuit Court.
Under city ordinance, centers must submit specific documentation and undergo a site plan review, public hearing over land use and secure a certificate of occupancy, business licensing and inspections, among other things. The requirements also cover site and security plans, insurance, lighting and parking specifications. Licenses must be renewed annually.
Centers can appeal to the city’s Board of Zoning Appeals for variances if they are turned down for being too close to schools, churches, liquor stores or other controlled uses. Challenges beyond that can be argued in circuit court.
Nathan Oakes, managing partner of Greener Crossing, a caregiver center on the city’s east side, said he supports the strict laws, saying they help rid the city of facilities that aren’t running honest business.
Oakes, a U.S. Marine Corps. veteran, said he got into the business to ensure safe access for veterans. He opened the center in October 2015 on a heavily industrial section of Hoover, off Eight Mile.
Oakes’ center is among those the city has allowed to continue serving patients while completing the application process. He’s endured the various steps and is obtaining his certificate of occupancy and inspections. He hopes to get his business license by spring.
“I find (the city) to be strict. I think that’s a good thing,” he said. “There’s a lot of fly-by-night organizations trying to just grab money in this business. Then, there’s the legitimate operations serving the patients. I think the ordinance helps distinguish between those two.”
But Andre Godwin, who represents the Sons of Hemp, a group of herbalists, caregivers and dispensary owners, said the laws have left many in limbo and are “making it bad for everyone.”
Godwin, who formerly filed a legal challenge to the new law, said the city is being “too intrusive” and the group is considering a petition drive to get a measure before voters in hopes of repealing it.
The Detroit News Published 10:50 p.m. ET March 16, 2017
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2017/03/16/detroit-marijuana/99284732/
Jun 10, 2017 | Blog, News
Lansing – 5/30/17 – Carrying a concealed pistol in Michigan without a permit or completing any gun safety training would be legal under a package of bills that a House committee approved Tuesday.
The measure now goes to the full House for consideration after Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee approved the package in a series of 6-4 votes with all Democrats voting no. Democrats failed to persuade the panel to approve any amendments leaving intact some current restrictions for carrying concealed pistols.
The plan would scrap criminal penalties for people who carry concealed pistols without permits, effectively eliminating the need for a permit in most parts of the state. People who want to carry concealed firearms must currently pay for a $100 permit application plus a fingerprint fee and another $115 every four years to renew the license. Gun training classes can cost hundreds of dollars.
Gun rights activists said the state’s current permit process is essentially a “coat tax” because gun owners need a permit to place a pistol in their coat but not to wear it openly on their hip. Opponents said the bills would make Michigan less safe, fearing that more people will roam the streets and sidewalks with guns hidden in their waistbands or coats.
The new package has won the support of House Speaker Tom Leonard, R-Dewitt, who said current permit requirements “may be outdated” because state law doesn’t require any permit to openly carry firearms.
“It’ll work its way through the committee process, but he thinks it’s a good package of bills,” Leonard spokesman Gideon D’Assandro previously told The Detroit News.
Committee chairman Rep. Jim Runestad, R-White Lake, and other Republicans rejected Democrat-backed amendments that would have stopped people who are currently barred from obtaining a concealed pistol license from carrying a pistol without a permit. Republicans did not offer an explanation for their votes.
Under the package, people with certain misdemeanor convictions could carry concealed weapons even though their criminal records currently stop them from getting a permit. They potentially include those with certain sexual assault or sex offender convictions.
The original Republican-backed concealed carry law passed in 2000 sparked fears by opponents of a spike in shootings — something that did not happen. At that time, supporters said restrictions such as completing training and getting a permit would be prudent safeguards.
Lawmakers sent the bills to the full House after Second Amendment supporters and gun control advocates two weeks ago flooded an earlier committee hearing on the legislation.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/05/30/house-permit-less-concealed-pistol/102318456/
May 15, 2017 | Blog, News
MEMORANDUM FOR ALL FEDERAL PROSECUTORS
FROM: THE ATTORNEY GENERAL~
SUBJECT: Department Charging and Sentencing Policy
May 10, 2017
This memorandum establishes charging and sentencing policy for the Department of Justice. Our responsibility is to fulfill our role in a way that accords with the law, advances public safety, and promotes respect for our legal system. It is of the utmost importance to enforce the law fairly and consistently. Charging and sentencing recommendations are crucial responsibilities for any federal prosecutor. The directives I am setting forth below are simple but important. They place great confidence in our prosecutors and supervisors to apply them in a thoughtful and disciplined manner, with the goal of achieving just and consistent results in federal cases.
First, it is a core principle that prosecutors should charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense. This policy affirms our responsibility to enforce the law, is moral and just, and produces consistency. This policy fully utilizes the tools Congress has given us. By definition, the most serious offenses are those that carry the most substantial guidelines sentence, including mandatory minimum sentences.
There will be circumstances in which good judgment would lead a prosecutor to conclude that a strict application of the above charging policy is not warranted. In that case, prosecutors should carefully consider whether an exception may be justified. Consistent with longstanding Department of Justice policy, any decision to vary from the policy must be approved by a United States Attorney or Assistant Attorney General, or a supervisor designated by the United States Attorney or Assistant Attorney General, and the reasons must be documented in the file .
Second, prosecutors must disclose to the sentencing court all facts that impact the sentencing guidelines or mandatory minimum sentences, and should in all cases seek a reasonable sentence under the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553. In most cases, recommending a sentence within the advisory guideline range will be appropriate. Recommendations for sentencing departures or variances require supervisory approval, and the reasoning must be documented in the file .
Any inconsistent previous policy of the Department of Justice relating to these matters is rescinded, effective today.
Each United States Attorney and Assistant Attorney General is responsible for ensuring that this policy is followed, and that any deviations from the core principle are justified by unusual facts.
I have directed the Deputy Attorney General to oversee implementation of this policy and to issue any clarification and guidance he deems appropriate for its just and consistent application.
Working with integrity and professionalism, attorneys who implement this policy will meet the high standards required of the Department of Justice for charging and sentencing.
Attorney General Release Document Link
