By Ruth Brown, Idaho Reports
After an hour-and-a-half of debate, the Idaho House of Representatives voted 55-13 to pass a bill that would add mandatory minimum prison sentences to law for trafficking fentanyl.
The vote on HB 406, sponsored by Rep. Ted Hill, R-Eagle, drew attention early on, as a similar bill failed to make it out of committee last year. The bill now heads to the Senate.
Idaho already has mandatory minimum prisons sentences in law for trafficking marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin. Fentanyl will be added to the list, should the bill pass.
In addition to trafficking, Hill’s bill includes a new “drug-induced homicide” statute, under which a person could be charged with a felony if they supply the drug that later kills someone. Under the bill, the crime would be punishable by up to life in prison.
Hill called fentanyl a “scourge on America” and said he wanted to give law enforcement the tools they needed to make the arrests. He stressed that the bill was targeting people who deal drugs, not users or addicts.
“We want to give law enforcement the tools they need to go after this threat,” Hill said. “Deterrence is real.”
A handful of conservative lawmakers joined the Democrats in opposition to the bill.
“I still believe that an individual sitting at that bench making a determination as to the circumstances should have the discretion to make a determination as to what that sentence should be,” said Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens, in opposition to mandatory minimums.
Rep. Illana Rubel, D-Boise, is a longtime supporter of removing mandatory minimum sentences altogether. She said she’s spoken to attorneys and judges about the issue they present. Some legislators focused on the fact that heroin already carries a mandatory minimum, which Rubel addressed in debate.
“I don’t know that the answer is to conform to already broken system,” Rubel said. “I have come to believe that mandatory minimum sentences are the greatest sources of injustice in our criminal laws right now.”
She stressed that judges do have the authority to issue heavy sentences, when they see fit.
“The justice system is supposed to accomplish a lot more than deterrence,” Rubel said.
Rep. David Cannon, R-Blackfoot, spoke at-length on issues he took with the bill, but ultimately voted in favor of it. Cannon is a criminal defense lawyer and previously served as a deputy prosecutor.
“Like most or all of you, I want to do something about that scourge,” Cannon said about fentanyl. “I also believe this bill is flawed and flawed in some very significant ways.”
The mandatory minimum a person could face if found with fentanyl depends solely on the weight of the drug a person possesses.
Cannon said he felt like it “casts too wide of a net” and could unintentionally impact users or innocent people. The charge could label someone as a drug trafficker without the prosecution having to prove there was an intent to distribute the drugs.
Under the bill, a person could be sentenced for trafficking fentanyl and would face a mandatory minimum of three years in prison for knowingly possessing 4 grams to less than 14 grams, or 100 pills to less than 250 fentanyl pills.
For possessing 14 to less than 28 grams of fentanyl or 250 pills to less than 500 pills, the mandatory minimum increases to five years in prison and a $15,000 fine.
For possessing 28 grams or more, or 500 pills or more of fentanyl, the mandatory minimum sentence would be 10 years in prison and a $25,000 fine.
The maximum sentence for trafficking fentanyl would be life in prison and a $100,000 fine. A second offense for trafficking fentanyl, under the proposed law, would result in a mandatory minimum sentence twice what is otherwise required under the bill.
The “no” votes on the bill came from Barbieri, Rep. Kevin Andrus, R-Lava Hot Springs, Rep. Tony Wisniewski, R-Post Falls, Rep. Elaine Price, R-Coeur d’Alene, Rep. Ron Mendive, R-Coeur d’Alene, in addition to the House Democrats, who all voted against the bill.