How Drug Conspiracy Laws Target Everyday People

How Drug Conspiracy Laws Target Everyday People

Drug conspiracy laws were originally intended to go after kingpins and high-level members of drug trafficking organizations. But over time, prosecutors have used them to target low-level offenders and even people with only loose associations to drug activity. This expansive application of conspiracy laws has led to extremely long sentences for many defendants who played minor roles.

Conspiracy laws allow prosecutors to hold someone criminally liable based on their agreement to commit a crime, even if they don’t actually carry it out. So under federal drug conspiracy statutes, a defendant can face the same charges and penalties as a drug kingpin if they are found to have agreed to traffic drugs, regardless of whether they handled any drugs themselves.

Many states also have their own conspiracy laws. And in both state and federal cases, prosecutors often hit defendants with conspiracy charges on top of other substantive drug charges. This allows them to introduce more evidence and can result in longer sentences.

How Conspiracy Laws Work

The gist of conspiracy charges is that the defendant agreed with someone else to break the law. They don’t have to actually succeed in committing the crime. The agreement itself is the key element.

Prosecutors can use conspiracy charges to go after entire networks of drug traffickers. So if they bust a drug ring, they can charge each member with conspiracy to distribute drugs. Defendants can be found guilty even if they personally didn’t handle or sell any drugs, as long as they knew about and agreed to participate in the broader scheme.

Conspiracy laws also allow prosecutors to hold defendants responsible for much larger quantities of drugs than they individually may have trafficked. For example, if a drug ring moved 1,000 kilos of cocaine, each member of the conspiracy can be sentenced based on the full 1,000 kilos, regardless of what their own role and profit may have been [2].

Mandatory minimum sentences are often tied to the amount of drugs involved. So under conspiracy laws, defendants can end up with extremely long sentences – 10 years, 20 years, even life without parole – based on the total quantity moved by the group rather than their own actions.

Problems With Broad Application

While conspiracy laws make sense when applied to major players in drug rings, critics say prosecutors have gone too far by using them against low-level offenders, friends, girlfriends, and others with only loose ties to drug activity.

There are many examples of people getting hit with lengthy conspiracy sentences despite playing truly minor roles:

• A woman let her drug-dealing brother stay in her house for six months and helped count his money. Prosecutors offered a 10-year plea deal but she refused and got a nearly 20-year sentence at trial [2].
• A man was offered a 20-year plea deal for cocaine distribution but went to trial and got life without parole [2].
• A defendant caught with marijuana and a gun was offered 15 years but refused to plead and got 55 years [2].

Critics argue these types of sentences are unjust and fail to match the defendant’s actual role and culpability. They say conspiracy laws give prosecutors too much leverage to force plea deals and punish those who exercise their right to a trial.

Questionable Police Tactics

In some cases, the conspiracy charges stem from questionable police tactics. Cops will intentionally target people on the fringes of drug activity to try to get them to flip on bigger players. They may use pressure, threats, or false promises to get minor offenders to engage in conversations or actions that support conspiracy charges.

There are many examples of apparent police overreach:

• An informant befriended a small-time dealer and repeatedly asked him to arrange a drug deal. After many rejections, the dealer finally made a call in front of the informant. He was then charged with conspiracy [3].
• Police used roadblocks to randomly stop cars and pressure drivers to answer questions and consent to searches. Any drugs found were used as evidence of broader conspiracies [3].
• In reverse sting operations, undercover officers would initiate drug deals with targets and then use conspiracy laws to connect them to imaginary drug networks [3].

Defense lawyers argue these types of operations manufacture conspiracy evidence against low-level offenders. But prosecutors can still pursue lengthy sentences based on it.

Harsh Plea Bargaining Tactics

Another major critique of conspiracy charges is that they give prosecutors excessive leverage in plea negotiations. By stacking multiple charges and threatening severe mandatory minimums, prosecutors can essentially force defendants to plead guilty.

Prosecutors will often come to minor players with “take it or leave it” plea deals for 10, 15 or 20 years. The alternative is risking a trial with potential life sentences. Many defendants feel they have no choice but to take the deal, even if they have viable defenses.

Critics say these coercive tactics undermine the right to a fair trial. And they result in defendants getting “trial penalties” – sentences 2, 3 or even 5 times longer than the plea offer, just for exercising their trial rights.

Calls for Reform

Due to the problems above, many criminal justice reform advocates argue conspiracy laws are in need of reform. Some suggested changes include:

• Limiting conspiracy charges to major players who bear high responsibility
• Limiting the use of mandatory minimums and capping sentences
• Letting judges depart from mandatory sentences in minor cases
• Providing affirmative defenses for those with minimal roles
• Requiring prosecutors to prove “overt acts” in furtherance of the conspiracy

There is also a push around improving police practices and limiting questionable sting operations that manufacture conspiracy evidence.

While conspiracy laws remain on the books, the hope is to refocus them on major traffickers and curb excessive sentences for low-level offenders.

In recent years, some bipartisan progress has been made at dialing back mandatory minimums and other harsh drug war policies. But there is still a long way to go in creating a more balanced justice system.

Going forward, lawmakers and the public must weigh whether conspiracy prosecutions are being applied fairly and serving justice – or going beyond their intended purpose.

References

[1] How Drug Trafficking Conspiracy Laws Put Regular People in Prison for Life, Vice, 2015.

[2] An Offer You Can’t Refuse: How US Federal Prosecutors Force Drug Defendants to Plead Guilty, Human Rights Watch, 2013.

[3] Criminal Conspiracy Law: Time to Turn Back From an Ever Expanding, Ever More Troubling Area, William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 1992.