Another Stash House Sting Criticized By The Court... But Lengthy Sentences Left Untouched
from the zero-positive-contribution-to-society dept
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has let some more stash house sting convictions stand. But not without considerable discussion of the government's tactics. And not without one judge appending a long rebuke to her reluctant concurrence.
Once again, the ATF has managed to secure multiple convictions predicated on nonexistent evidence. The sting, helmed by veteran ATF agent Richard Zayas, involved a made-up drug stash house "containing" at least enough drugs to trigger 10-year mandatory minimum sentences for the defendants. Zayas' sting operations always include fictitious armed stash house guards, otherwise the ATF's involvement would be unnecessary.
The end result is multiple convictions. But other than a few seized weapons, nothing contributing to public safety was achieved. No actual drug dealer was targeted, nor was the sting linked with any larger ATF/DEA/FBI operation aimed at curbing inner city drug trade.
Nonetheless, the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court upholds everything, rejecting multiple due process challenges from the defendants. The entire opinion [PDF] should be read just to understand the nearly-insurmountable barriers defendants face when challenging questionable government behavior -- both during the sting and during the trial.
Judge Jane Stranch's concurrence clearly communicates her displeasure with ATF sting operations in general, even if it's tempered by her inability to move the dial in the appellants' favor.
Because these stings are wholly inventions of law enforcement agents, they can and do include powerful inducements to participate in one big “hit,” a hit that is conveniently large enough to qualify for mandatory minimum sentences. Obtaining the outsized reward is also made to look easy—the agent is a disgruntled insider who knows when and how to stage these “rip-and-runs” and offers to provide all needed assistance, from manpower to transportation. The unseemly nature of the Government’s activity is emphasized by its failure to achieve its declared goals of jailing dangerous criminals and making our streets safer. Evidence showing that these hurry-up set-ups achieve the stated goals was not proffered and the facts here demonstrate why: no known dangerous individuals or criminal enterprises were researched or targeted and no pre-existing drug rings or conspiracies were broken up. In fact, this sting trapped Flowers, a gainfully employed young man with no criminal record.
This sting was like others helmed by Agent Zaya: it targeted impoverished inner city minorities. As the judge notes, the fact that ATF stings are disproportionately resulting in the jailing of minorities has not gone unnoticed. It's not just dissertations or investigations by journalists exposing this fact. The ATF is currently facing a lawsuit in Illinois over the selective targeting shown in sting operations.
Stranch goes on to note multiple courts have found the ATF's actions troubling. But, so far, they've been unable to do much to stem the flow of stash house sting cases into the nation's courts. They've also been unable -- with rare, rare exceptions -- to provide any sort of relief for defendants caught up in the government's fictitious drug robbery plans.
Despite increasing awareness of the problems and inequities inherent in fictitious stash house stings, at issue here is whether an appropriate legal path exists for a defendant to successfully challenge the stings. A majority of circuits have recognized the outrageous government defense, but impose such a high burden on defendants that the defense rarely results in dismissal of charges.
[...]
[I]t seems we remain without an established vehicle in the law to define a dividing line between law enforcement practices that are honorable and those that are not. In the interim, these questionable schemes continue to use significant government resources and to adversely impact the poor, minorities, and those attempting to re-integrate into society. And they apparently do so with no increase in public safety and no deterrence of or adverse effect on real stash houses. These costly and concerning sting operations do not accord with the principles of our criminal justice system and I hope they will be discontinued.
The ATF continues to spend considerable amounts of money doing little to stop the flow of contraband. It would rather chalk up easy arrests and convictions while doing almost nothing to contribute to public safety. Taxpayers are already paying the ATF to engage in literal charades. They're also on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars in incarceration costs per sting victim thanks to the ATF's insistence on pretending there's mandatory minimum-triggering amounts of nonexistent drugs in every fake stash house it convinces someone to rob.
This is nasty, brutish work by the government. But it works too well to expect the ATF to voluntarily end this program. It produces too many convictions to be considered a waste of time by the ATF, even as its does nothing at all to stop the trafficking of drugs and guns.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 6th circuit, atf, own plots, richard zayas, stash house, sting
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If simply imagining a robbery that won't ever actually happen, of a stash of contraband that does not exist, using weapons you don't have, committed against a victim who does not exist either is enough for a conviction, then I foresee a really sharp drop in the quality of action adventure novels, movies and games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
People are convicted just like this every day in America. And where I live, in Texas, always remember that our Court of Criminal Appeals (highest criminal court in TX) has stated emphatically that "actual innocence is no bar to execution".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And where I live, in Texas, always remember that our Court of Criminal Appeals (highest criminal court in TX) has stated emphatically that "actual innocence is no bar to execution".
So whether someone is guilty of not doesn't matter, if the system decide you deserve to die then you will be executed, I'm guessing because they consider the image of the courts as 'ALWAYS RIGHT' of higher importance than the lives of those it judges.
Delightful.
Wonder if anyone in history has anything to say about that mindset...
'It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished. But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection, and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.'
― John Adams
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So I guess in that context, it's a warning against blaming all members of a group of people for the actions of a minority. Like persecuting Muslims because of a handful of terrorists, or forfeiting a family's car/house because one of their kids trafficked some drugs, or just using somebody as a scapegoat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent," Scalia wrote in a 2009 dissent.
To say that 'justice' in America is FUBAR would qualify as an understatement of Olympic caliber.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: judicially murdered man
The appropriate thing would have been for the judge to personally ask the Governor to pardon the innocent man.
If he didn't (and you imply so), he failed in his moral duty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Damn, if anything that is far worse than I originally thought. They not only knowingly executed an innocent person they knowingly let a murderer walk, simply because they couldn't admit that the system screwed an innocent man and was wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Should be read?
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Should be read?
No big deal, the sheeple are too busy watching cat videos on Facebook to bother rioting over this injustice anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Should be read?
Why do you encourage rioting - must be one of those russky bots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
The war on drugs has:
1. Filled prisons with inmates, gotta make a profit on all those concrete walls somehow!
2. Made it extremly difficult to get prescription opiates forcing addicts to instead buy the may or may not kill you black market heroin. This way we can put drug dealers in prison for life after convicting them of murder, more prison profit!
3. Increased spending on law enforcement. Cool weapons and awesome pensions cost money!
4. Drive up costs of some prescriptions because of their classifications. Big pharma, profit yum yum want more!
5. Money stolen, err seized, from law abiding individuals for having the audacity to drive on the same roads of drug runners. Pensions, guns and armored vehicles, oh my! Oh and fuck those poor people, they were just gonna buy drugs with that money so we did them a favor by taking it!
6. An increase in drug use. Rinse and repeat for additional profit year after year!
If the goal was to funnel money to big pharma, for profit prisons, law enforcement and lawyers its a whopping succes! But its a total failure at reducing addiction.
Imagine the impact we could have if we stopped the war on drugs and instead funded the war on addiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
If we stopped referring to drug addiction in terms of war and instead referred framed the issue as one of public health, maybe we could do more to combat addiction. I mean, it ain’t like “the war on drugs” can be won by force—the past thirty years or so have proven as much.
Then again, by framing drug addition as a public health crisis instead of a conceptual war, we would have to reckon with what causes addiction. That would lead us to talking about poverty, systemic discrimination against people of color, and other “uncomfortable” subjects that would inevitably come back to politicians, their rich handlers, and the policies that help them keep their wealth and power at the expense of the lower classes. That group of people will never allow such a thing to happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
Farm animals get better health care than the average us citizen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
Looks to me more like the ATF is the enemy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Drugs are not the enemy, addiction is.
To get rid of this addiction we have to decouple war from increasing our economy, creating jobs, increasing 'security', ...
Drugs and drug addiction are one of the responses to this war, to cope with our helplessness with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
thanks to the ATF's insistence on pretending there's mandatory minimum-triggering amounts of nonexistent drugs in every fake stash house
Maybe the courts could just pretend they convict and sentence the people the ATF arrests. Unfortunately, they probably wouldn't be fooled by fake paychecks...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or base the sentencing on how much actual contraband there was in the building.
'The defendant is hereby found guilty of attempting to steal zero grams of cocaine, along with one count of trespassing. As such a modest fine and/or community service will be required for the latter charge. Court dismissed.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's good for the prosecution is good for the defense
If you can base a case on imaginary goods, then the defense should be allowed to introduce their own imaginary evidence.
Sure they 'thought' they were stealing a certain amount of drugs, but what's that compared to the cure for cancer and a formula for ending world hunger that was also located in the house? Seems to me those two would more than balance out, such that if anything they defendant should be praised rather than prosecuted for their selfless efforts that just so happened to include a minor personal gain angle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's good for the prosecution is good for the defense
With all the hidden cameras and microphones you must have gotten plenty of great footage! When does the first episode air? Will this be on TruTV? I wanted to tell my father what network to watch, he's just as excited to see my performance as I am.
Whoever does the makeup on this production is great. When officer Bumblefuck stepped on the rake and gave himself a black eye, man that shit looked real! And using real police radios in the patrol cars, capturing real police chatter will make this show seem more real!
Can I get a smoothie? That nasty prison food makes for some good reality TV but damn only so much of that a man can take!
Well sorry for the interruption, you can just erase this footage and we can start over and reshoot this scene now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's good for the prosecution is good for the defense
Hahahahaha, I see a new show debuting soon - sorta like office space but in a court room
PC LOAD LETTER ?????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How far will they go with these fantasy crime convictions?
These convictions based on the idea that there was no actual crime, but the defendant thought that there was are almost too surreal. I wonder how the courts would rule if the feds stole (forfeited) someone's car, had it repainted, and then convinced the owner that the car is someone else's, but that he should steal it because his was stolen and this one is the same model. Would it be ok to convict that person of grand theft auto for stealing his own car? Would the AFT (gasoline is combustible, so I'm sure they consider this part of their bailiwick) be on board with the scam? No? What if the target were tricked into bringing a gun along (provided by the feds, of course) to the "robbery"? What if the target were told there was $1,000,000 of cocaine in the trunk? And kiddie porn?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How far will they go with these fantasy crime convictions?
There still is a crime. They are still intending to rip off a stash house, they still go through the process, and they effectively commit the crime.
There is still criminal activity.
Honestly, I don't have a lot of sympathy for those arrested. That the FBI got them in a sting rather than their next bar buddy who gets them to do a home invasion in a rich part of town is probably a good thing. These people who commit the crime - and they did - so getting them off the streets isn't a bad thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How far will they go with these fantasy crime convictions?
Hope you feel the same when a group of popular boys pressure your not so popular daughter into doing something she normally would not do.
Or is it only ok to pressure people into doing things if it results in the pressured person committing a crime and going to jail?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: How far will they go with these fantasy crime convictions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting that those with a few bucks and notoriety are given a pass ... Winning!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Government is the Enemy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Government is the Enemy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Government is the Enemy
Acton
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Too many cops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Too many cops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]