The Docket passes on an interesting opinion out of the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts. The U.S. Attorney sought to dismiss charges against Andrew Sullivan for possession of marijuana, citing only the “interests of justice” in support. The magistrate judge was not satisfied with that explanation and was frustrated in his efforts to find out why the U.S. Attorney would decline to prosecute Sullivan while routinely prosecuting others for the same offense.
It seems that Sullivan, a citizen of the U.K., is applying for a different immigration status, and a conviction might complicate that effort.
At the hearing, [Judge] Collings observed that Sullivan would still have to state on his application that he had been charged with a crime, and he asked both the prosecutor and Sullivan’s attorney, Robert Delahunt Jr. (cousin of U. S. Rep. William D. Delahunt), for more information about why paying the $125 would have “any additional adverse effect.”
No politics at play here.
The bottom line is this: The judge can’t force the U.S. Attorney to prosecute Sullivan and can’t require the prosecutor to give a good reason for declining to prosecute. But the judge can publish an opinion and shine a light on the unequal treatment and apparent political favoritism. And that’s just what he did.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 2 trackbacks }