Opinion ID: 2966437
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Sentencing Disparity Between Crack Cocaine

Text: and Powder Cocaine The defendants (collectively) also argue that their sentences should be reversed because Congress's decision to punish convicted crack cocaine dealers more severely than powder cocaine dealers lacks any rational basis and, therefore, is unconstitutional. The Fourth Circuit has reviewed that precise issue in the past and found that Congress could rationally have concluded that distribution of cocaine base [crack] is a greater menace to society than distribution of cocaine powder and warranted greater penalties because it is less expensive and, therefore, more accessible, because it is considered more addictive than cocaine powder and because it is specifically targeted toward youth. United States v. Thomas, 900 F.2d 37, 39-40. (4th Cir. 1990). Many other circuits have also upheld the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. See , e.g., United States v. Singleterry, 29 F.3d 733, 740 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 647 (1994); United States v. Stevens, 19 F.3d 93, 97 (2d Cir. 1994); United States v. Reece, 994 F.2d 277, 278-79 (6th Cir. 1993) (per curiam); United States v. Williams, 982 F.2d 1209, 1213 (8th Cir. 1992); United States v. Frazier, 981 F.2d 92, 95 (3d Cir. 1992) (per 5 curiam), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 1661 (1993); United States v. Lawrence, 951 F.2d 751, 754-55 (7th Cir. 1991); United States v. Galloway, 951 F.2d 64, 65-66 (5th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). The defendants argue that a recent report by the United States Sentencing Commission which concludes that the disparity is not rational should change the court's decision on the matter. A Sentencing Commission report does not change our earlier holdings. Furthermore, Congress rejected the Sentencing Commission's report and recommendation and refused to change the disparity in crack cocaine versus powder cocaine sentences. Thus, we find the defendants' arguments as to the sentencing disparity without merit.