(For those unfamiliar with the issue, the mandatory minimum penalties for crack cocaine are 100 times more severe than the penalties for powder cocaine and Congress has refused to change them despite recommendations from the Sentencing Commission and a host of others. It takes 500 grams of powder to warrant a 5 year mandatory minimum sentence but only 5 grams of crack. A ten year mandatory minimum sentence applies for 5000 grams (5 kilos) of powder but only 50 grams of crack.)

Here's what Judge Presnell wrote in his opinion (don't miss the final paragraph):

United States. v. Hamilton, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30350 (D. Fla. 2006) (decided March 30, 2006.)

The chemical compound C17H21NO4 occurs naturally in the coca leaf. This compound is usually processed for importation into the United States by dissolving the cocaine base in hydrochloric acid and water to create a salt: cocaine hydrochloride, C17H22C1NO4 (powder cocaine). Powder cocaine may then be converted back to its base form by cooking it with baking soda and water. See U.S. v. Sloan, 97 F.3d 1378, 1381-82 (11th Cir. 1996). In numerous trials before this Court, the Government's forensic chemists have testified that powder and crack cocaine are the same chemical substance, just in a different form.

Yet, there is a radical disparity in the fashioning of sentences imposed upon those defendants found guilty of crack cocaine offenses and those imposed upon defendants guilty of powder cocaine offenses. For example, there is the "100 to1" powder to crack ratio, pursuant to which a defendant who has a certain quantity of crack will receive the same mandatory minimum sentence as a defendant who has one hundred times that amount of powder cocaine. See 21 U.S.C. § § 841 (b)(1)(A), (b)(1)(B) (mandatory minimum sentences often and five years, respectively, imposed upon defendants for five kilograms of powder or fifty grams of crack cocaine (under (b)(1)(A)), and five hundred grams of powder or five grams of crack cocaine (under (b)(1)(B)). The Guidelines have incorporated this ratio, so that five kilograms of powder cocaine and fifty grams of crack cocaine are both scored at the same level.

This disparity has been widely criticized, and the United States Sentencing Commission itself has repeatedly suggested that a 20:1 ratio would be more appropriate. n11 United States Sentencing Commission, "Fifteen Years of Guidelines Sentencing," 131-32 (Nov. 2004).

The Sentencing Commission has also reported that many of the rationales originally relied upon to produce the disparity between powder and crack cocaine are unsupportable, n12 because: (1) the harms associated with crack do not justify a substantially harsher treatment; (2) the increased addictiveness of crack results not from a pharmacological difference between it and powder cocaine, but from the differing manners in which the two drugs are normally used; n13 (3) the harms associated with crack are not as severe as initially feared and no more serious than those harms resulting from exposure to powder cocaine; (4) larger percentages of the defendants subject to the increased penalties do not fit the mold of serious or high-level traffickers that Congress intended to target when initially establishing those penalties, and instead, most crack cocaine offenders receiving these harsh penalties are low-level offenders; (5) crack cocaine is the only drug for which such harsh penalties are imposed on low-level offenders; and (6) high penalties for relatively small amounts of crack cocaine divert federal resources away from high-level traffickers toward low-level dealers. n14 Id. at 132. Finally, the crack/powder disparity results in a disparate impact along racial lines, with black offenders suffering significantly harsher penalties. n15 Id.

....This arbitrary and discriminatory disparity between powder and crack cocaine implicates the Section 3553(a)(2)(A) factors. Unless one assumes the penalties for powder cocaine are vastly too low, then the far-higher penalties for crack are at odds with the seriousness of the offense. The absence of a logical rationale for such a disparity and its disproportionate impact on one historically disfavored race promotes disrespect for the law and suggests that the resulting sentences are unjust. n16 Accordingly, these statutory factors weigh heavily against the imposition of a Guidelines sentence.

.....Because more than 95 percent of all criminal prosecutions result in a guilty plea, sentencing is the most significant role played by the judiciary in the administration of our criminal justice system. Reducing the Court's role in sentencing to that of merely rubber-stamping the will of Congress as interpreted by the Executive Branch would sabotage one of the essential checks and balances envisioned by our founders.

Like I said, Judge Presnell is no kook. We need more judges like him.