Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, February 24, 1993 TAG: 9302240181
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A2 EDITION: STATE
SOURCE: The Baltimore Sun
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
RULING: ADD PERJURY TIME WITHOUT TRIAL
The Supreme Court on Monday approved a new, fast way to punish defendants who lie on the stand during their trials: Just add more time to the prison sentence without a separate perjury trial.That shortcut, the court decided unanimously, would not violate any right the accused person has to try to convince a jury not to convict.
Under the decision, prosecutors appear to have a chance to get what amounts to a double result from the same evidence. Judges simply would use the evidence that led to a guilty verdict to contradict the accused person's testimony, rule that perjury had been committed and then lengthen the sentence that would have been given.
The decision was based on a part of the formal guidelines that control what federal judges may do in imposing criminal sentences. But because the court removed all constitutional doubt about that procedure, states would be free to adopt it.
In a second unanimous ruling Monday, the court sternly warned federal courts not to interfere when state legislatures or state courts are trying to work out new districting plans for their legislative and congressional seats.
In another part of that decision, the court made it more difficult for black and other minority voters to demand creation of new districts in which they would be the majority and thus better able to control election outcomes.
The court's decision on punishment for perjury came in the case of a Charleston, W.Va., woman, Sharon Dunnigan, who was convicted of being part of a ring that sold cocaine in the Charleston area in the late 1980s. Prosecutors said Dunnigan was the ring's connection to cocaine suppliers in Cleveland.
She took the stand at her trial and flatly denied any role in cocaine distribution or purchase, contradicting the evidence against her from five witnesses who described her involvement in detail. After the jury convicted her, the judge, following the U.S. sentencing guidelines, added two "levels" to the prison term the guidelines set.
The judge relied on a guideline saying that a two-level jump in a sentence is allowed for anyone who obstructs justice. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that that guideline was unconstitutional because it interfered with the right of a defendant to opt to testify.
The Circuit Court said it feared that in every case where an individual took the stand and denied the charges, a higher sentence would be imposed.
Overturning that, the Supreme Court said judges could use perjury as a basis for a higher sentence only if a separate finding was made, at sentencing, that the individual committed the equivalent of the separate crime of perjury.
Memo: shorter version ran in the Metro edition.