UPDATE (information obtained post publish date)"On October 27, Maine U.S. District Court Judge D. Brock Hornby ruled the reductions in the Fair Sentencing Act must be applied to those awaiting sentencing. on and after August 3, 2009. He acknowledged the Savings Clause law that other courts have relied on in rejecting application of the law to those whose conduct occurred before the law went into effect. but he said it "does not command special attention." He believes Congress did not intend for judges to continue to impose the harsher punishment based on the date of the offense."
----------------------------------------
In an effort to reduce the disparity between federal crack and powder cocaine sentences, Congress passed "The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010." The Act reduced penalties for some cocaine base ("crack cocaine") offenses, eliminated the mandatory minimum sentence requirement for simple possession of crack cocaine, and directed the U.S. Sentencing Commission to amend the sentencing guidelines to reflect certain aggravating and mitigating factors in a variety of drug cases.
The new law became effective on August 3, 2010, the date it was signed by President Obama. The law is silent as to whether it can be applied to crimes committed before that date.
The Department of Justice has taken the position that the law applies only to conduct occurring on or after August 3, 2010. Courts that have considered the issue since August 3 have agreed, ruling that under a law known as the "General Savings Statute," courts must apply the penalties in place at the time the crime was committed, unless a new law is enacted that expressly provides for its retroactive application. These courts have held the law's silence on the issue prevents them from applying the law retroactively.
Thus, at this time, the law does not apply to someone already convicted or, like your friend, who was still awaiting trial or sentencing on August 3, 2010. It also would not apply to someone charged in the future with a crime that occurred before August 3, 2010. Also, since your friend received a 25 year sentence, it's possible the amount of crack cocaine involved in his offense exceeded 280 grams. The law didn't reduce statutory penalties for amounts greater than 280 grams.
On the other hand, the law directed the Sentencing Commission to formulate new guidelines consistent with the law's new penalty provisions. The Commission has submitted temporary guideline changes, and has until 2011 to enact permanent new guidelines consistent with this law. If the commission's new guidelines lower the sentencing range for the amount of crack cocaine on which your friend's sentence is based, and specify that the change deserves retroactive application, at least for those who were awaiting sentence on August 3, 2010, he may be entitled to seek a sentence reduction in the near future.
In addition, the sentencing guidelines are no longer mandatory and courts consider a variety of other factors pertinent to the offender and the offense in determining the appropriate sentence. An attorney experienced in federal post-conviction matters or criminal appeals (assuming your friend filed a timely Notice of Appeal) should be able to review the sentencing documents and transcript of the sentencing hearing in your friend's case and advise him as to whether the judge made legal errors in determining the sentence, such as improperly calculating the guidelines, refusing to consider a departure from the guidelines or a variant sentence outside the guidelines; or gave short shrift to arguments pertaining to his personal history and characteristics or other factors the sentencing statute requires judges to consider.
...
Read More