While California has adopted a progressive stance toward narcotics offenses, the federal government remains as committed as ever to prosecuting drug crimes and putting people behind bars.

1. WHY YOU CAN'T
UNDERESTIMATE
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S
COMMITMENT TO THE WAR ON DRUGS
A White Paper Presented by Ron Cordova, Attorney-at-Law

2. Attorney Ron Cordova understands just how
serious a federal drug crime conviction can be,
affecting your permanent record, your
professional reputation and, of course, your
personal freedom.
As such, he wants to help you better understand
both your rights and the law itself, including why
certain terms often used in relation to narcotics
offenses -- decriminalization, legalization,
reform, etc. -- are simply not in the vocabulary of
the federal government.

3. IN THIS PRESENTATION,
YOU WILL LEARN MORE
ABOUT:
• California's current stance toward
drug crimes
• The federal government's current
stance toward drug crimes
• The severity of convictions for federal
drug crimes

4. California's stance
toward drug crimes has
evolved considerably
over the last two decades
thanks to the efforts of
law enforcement officials,
state lawmakers and, of
course, voters.

5. This gradual move away from automatic
punishment and incarceration for drug
crimes here in the Golden State was made
possible by some of the following measures:
• Compassionate Use Act (1996): Made California
the first state to legalize marijuana for medicinal
purposes
• Proposition 36 (2012): Gave those sentenced to
life in prison for minor drug crimes under the Three
Strikes law the ability to seek sentence reductions
• Proposition 47 (2014): Made California the first
state to mandate misdemeanor sentences for the
majority of drug possession offenses

6. HAS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ADOPTED
A SIMILARLY PROGRESSIVE
APPROACH TO DRUG
CRIMES?

7. THE ANSWER IS A
RESOUNDING NO.
Federal prosecutors and law
enforcement officials remain as
committed as ever to fighting the war
on drugs across the nation, including
right here in California.
NO!

8. STATISTICS FROM THE
UNITED STATES SENTENCING
COMMISSION SHOW JUST HOW
SERIOUS THIS COMMITMENT IS:
• Drug trafficking offenses comprised
30.4 percent of all reported federal
criminal offenses for fiscal year 2013,
with 96.3 percent of offenders in these
cases ultimately being sent to prison.
• The Southern District of California saw
1,426 federal drug trafficking cases for
fiscal year 2013, second only to the
Western District of Texas.
30.4%
2ND
IN NATION

9. HOW CONCERNED
SHOULD DEFENDANTS BE
ABOUT THE PROSPECT
OF FACING FEDERAL
DRUG CHARGES?

10. VERY CONCERNED, AS THE STAKES FOR
DEFENDANTS ARE MUCH HIGHER IN
FEDERAL COURT, INCLUDING:
Larger fines
Limited possibilities for probation
Mandatory minimum sentences

11. FEDERAL MANDATORY
MINIMUM SENTENCES ARE
ESPECIALLY ALARMING given
that they are tied solely to the
type of drug and the quantity
found by law enforcement
officials.
TRANSLATION: The more
dangerous the drug and/or the
more of it that was present, the
more years a person will likely
spend in federal prison.

12. To show just how serious the
federal mandatory minimums
sentences are, consider that a
conviction on first-offense drug
trafficking charges can result in
anywhere from five years to 40
years or 10 years to life depending
on the amount of drugs involved.

13. FREE
WHITE PAPER
To learn more about federal drug
charges and, more importantly,
how California's new approach
to drug crimes must not lead you
to underestimate the federal
government's resolve, please
read a free copy of our firm's
white paper.
© 2015 Ron Cordova, Attorney-at-Law All Rights Reserved. Design and editorial services by FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters
SHARE THE WHITE PAPER
   