Drugs - Drugs: Convictions And Sentencing Trends

Data shown in the graphic are total arrests for drug offenses and conviction rates in state courts for four years. Only data for whites and blacks are shown. Arrest and conviction rates of other races are in the 1 to 2% range. The main point of this chart is to show that while whites are a consistently higher percentage of those arrested, they are also consistently the lower percentage of those convicted in state courts (where the overwhelming majority of cases are adjudicated). Conviction rates for whites have been trending up and rates for blacks have been trending down — possibly because these discrepancies in sentencing have produced a lot of pressure on the Justice System. But the gaps remain and — and they give rise to charges of unequal treatment of the majority and of the minority populations.

Most arrests are for possession — but most sentences are for selling or manufacturing drugs. Could this be an explanation of the uneven treatment of whites and blacks? The table on the following page provides a negative answer. It does not appear to matter what the charge is. Whether it is possession or trafficking, more blacks are convicted of the crime than whites.

Percentage Break-Down by Race of Individuals Sentenced In State Courts for Drug Offenses

	All Drug Offenses					Possession					Trafficking
		White	Black	Other	White	Black	Other	White	Black	Other
1992	44	55	1	44	55	1	44	55	1
1994	41	59	0	46	53	1	37	63	0
1996	45	53	2	49	49	2	43	56	1
1998	46	53	1	55	44	1	42	57	1

These numbers are startling because the black population is around 13% and the white around 75% of the population. At the front of the system, where the drug are consumed, the two major races of the nation are quite equivalent. At the tail of the system — where people are sentenced and sent to prison, the black involvement is very much out of proportion to the black's use of drugs and to the proportion of black arrests. In 1998, blacks were 37% of those arrested, but 53% of those sentenced in state courts.

It would be informative to track trends in imprisonment of whites versus blacks, — and other forms of disposition of those convicted. The table below shows that outcomes are equally unequal.

Felony Sentences Imposed by State Courts in 1992 and 1998 in Percent

		Incarceration											Nonincarceration
		Total	Total			Prison				Jail				Total				Probation				Other
Whites		1992	1998	1992	1998	1992	1998	1992	1998	1992	1998	1992	1998
Drug Offenses	100	75	65	34	33	41	32	25	35	24	32	1	3
Possession	100	69	67	29	31	40	36	31	33	30	30	1	3
Trafficking	100	80	64	37	35	42	29	20	36	20	33	1	3
Blacks													3
Drug Offenses	100	74	73	54	51	20	23	26	27	26	24	1	2
Possession	100	66	72	44	47	23	25	34	28	33	25	1	2
Trafficking	100	79	74	60	52	18	21	21	26	21	24		2

*Less than 0.5 percent.

This table shows that a smaller percentage of blacks than whites were incarcerated in 1992, a larger percentage in 1998. In both years, blacks were a substantially higher percentage of prisoners (serving more than a year). Smaller percentages of blacks received nonincarceration sentences in 1998. Blacks, in other words, received, on average, harsher sentences than whites, and the sentences have also grown harsher in the six years separating 1992 and 1998.

Lengths of sentences show a more even pattern in 1998. Using average maximum sentences imposed, we note that whites got 34 months for possession, blacks 33, whites got 54 months for trafficking, blacks 52. More blacks went to prison, but sentences were marginally lighter. Whites in jail for possession got 4 months, blacks 5, for trafficking whites got 5 month when sentence to jail, blacks 7. Whites on probation for possession got 32 months, blacks 37. The only absolute equality was in the case of probation sentences for trafficking — 36 months for both races.

Sentencing results are an improvement over 1992. That year, blacks received sentences 23.4% longer than whites for possession and 15.3% more for trafficking.

Other than assigning all the blame to plain, old-fashioned racism, which no doubt plays a role, how do we explain these differences? Two issues might suggest part of the answer: crack cocaine versus powdered cocaine and differential recidivism rates.

Crack. Blacks were 84% of crack cocaine offenders and 30% of powder cocaine offenders in 2000. A person convicted of possessing 500 grams of powdered cocaine with intent to distribute (a little over a pound) will get a mandatory 5 year sentence. For crack, the triggering quantity is 5 grams of crack (there are 28 grams to an ounce). Crack possessors are thus subject to much higher sentences, and most such people are black.

Crack is smoked and produces a rapid, intense "high." Powder is snorted. Its effect is slower, the high is less intense. Crack has developed a reputation as violence-inducing and highly addictive. The death of Len Bias in 1986, the University of Maryland Basketball player (bound for the Boston Celtics, but he never got there) was initially blamed on crack — although later it turned out that he had been using powdered cocaine on the night of his death. That event played a major role in the formation of crack's reputation.

Congress has resisted revising the quantity-ratio triggering mandatory sentencing and, in 1995, rejected a recommendation by the U.S. Sentencing Commission to equalize the ratios. "Devil Crack" remains enthroned up there with "Demon Drink."

Recidivism. Blacks are much more likely to be rearrested (72.9% versus 62.7% for whites in 1994), to be reconvicted (51.1% vs. 43.3%), and returned to prison with a new sentence (28.5% vs. 22.6% for whites). This is for all crimes. Those with prior convictions get harsher sentences. More black drug offenders may appear before the courts as repeat offenders and hence may harvest harsher sentences.

Lawyers? What about appointed versus privately-hired lawyers? Blacks were more likely to be represented by public defenders — 76.6% versus 69.0% for whites in 1997 in state courts. But publicly defended drug offenders did better than privately defended persons. They got lower sentences (97 versus 140 months) and were expected to serve less time before release (46 months versus 58 for those with the expensive lawyers).

Many other factors, of course, play a role, including the perceptions of judges and juries of the potential danger individuals pose to society. Profiling is inherent in our perceptions. Yes, it exists. As does racial bias.

Sources: Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 1994-2000, downloaded from http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/ or obtained from the Sourcebook CD-ROM. The Sentencing Project, "Crack Cocaine Sentencing Policy: Unjustified and Unreasonable," undated, downloaded October 17, 2002 from http://www.sentencingproject.org/pubs/tsppubs/1090bs.htm. U.S. Department of Justice, Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994, June 2002.