Skip to main content

HELP. 5 year mandatory minimum, trying for safety valve, need advice please!

Davison, MI |

ive been charged with a 5 year mandatory minimum for selling drugs, i meet the first 4 criteria for the safety valve and have met with the DEA to cooperate, giving them the information on where it came from, and other questions they asked. I allowed them to search my phone, memory cards, and computer they confiscated. ive complied with everything they have asked but my lawyer says without a controlled buy its not likely i will get the safety valve. Is this right? i can't imagine they want to give me the full 60 months after all of this, i dont know if im getting bullied into more cooperation but my plea is soon and im scared thats what they might push for. any insight would be greatly appreciated!

Attorney Answers 7

Posted

The standards for "safety valve" eligibility are set forth in 18 U.S.C. Section 3553(f). There is nothing in that statute that requires you to make a "controlled buy" in order to be eligible.

This is a decision that is made by the Court at sentencing, not by the federal prosecutors. Of course, you will have a better chance of convincing the Court that you are eligible if the government agrees that you qualify for the safety valve. But it would be improper for the government to refuse to recommend you solely because you declined to participate in a controlled buy -- the relevant criteria is whether you have truthfully provided all relevant information and evidence to the government.

The safety valve simply gets you out of the mandatory 5-year minimum, and you may still be facing a substantial sentence under the applicable Sentencing Guidelines. One way for you to receive a lower sentence under the Guidelines is to provide additional cooperation with the government (called "substantial assistance" under the Guidelines). If you were to participate in a controlled buy, this may qualify as substantial assistance and may entitle you to additional reductions in the Guidelines range pursuant to Section 5K1.1 of the Guidelines.

But in order to benefit from any downward departure due to substantial assistance, you need to get out from under the 5-year mandatory minimum first.

Mark as helpful

1 found this helpful

5 lawyers agree

Posted

Your criminal defense attorney is correct.You will most likely need to do a controlled by under these circumstances.

Jonathan N. Portner, Esquire, Portner & Shure, P.A. Maryland and Virginia Personal Injury Attorneys. This response is general information and not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. This response should not be relied upon. Please note that no attorney-client relationship exists between the sender and the recipient of this message in the absence of either (1) a signed fee contract and (2) remission of an agreed-upon retainer. Absent such an agreement and retainer, I am not engaged by you as an attorney, nor is any other member of my law firm

Mark as helpful

4 lawyers agree

Posted

While I can understand your concerns, I agree that you may need to participate in a controlled buy. Although not in every case, I have seen DEA or other agents speak with the prosecutor, the defense and the judge (off the record) about cooperation/assistance they receive from a client. My sense is that this may be the only option available to you under the circumstances.

Mark as helpful

3 lawyers agree

Posted

This is not correct. If you meet all of the other safety valve requirements, there is only the requirement that you give the government a full and complete accounting of your behavior. There is no requirement that you do a controlled buy.

This answer is for informational purposes only. By answering this question, no attorney/client relationship is created. Although the legal information is accurate, it may not be appropriate for your situation. The best way to handle any legal problem is to seek the advice of an attorney.

Mark as helpful

4 lawyers agree

Posted

Attorney Jensen is correct.
You do not need to do a controlled buy to avail yourself of safety valve. Cooperation with the government beyond making a proffer (meet and discuss) is not necessary. Also keep in mind that safety valve cooperation requires only that you provide complete and truthful information about the crime with which you are charged. You do not have to discuss people, crimes events or anything else that is not related to the current crime. Your confusion seems to arise form the difference between getting the safety valve and becoming a cooperating person or confidential informant for which you would usually get a lot more consideration than safety valve. Listen to your attorney. If he cannot make this distinction, get another attorney. YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED AN ATTORNEY IN THIS TYPE OF CASE. Also, as is the case with many of the questions on Avvo, you must remember that this is not a secure site and you must assume that it is or may be monitored so be careful what you throw out there into cyber space.

Mark as helpful

4 lawyers agree

1 comment

Asker

Posted

I understand I need to be careful but I am in desperate need of some insight as I do not have the money to go outside the court appointed attorney I have now. From what ive read of the safety valve I thought this was unnecessary but as i said before he has said it is unlikely without the controlled buy. i have met and discussed with the DEA, should i have known weather i made the safety valve after that, or might this come up at my plea? i dont mean to be ignorant but i am in desperate need of advice

Posted

I know not nearly enough about your case to give you even remotely close to as good advice as an attorney that has seen all of the discovery and spoke with the ADA and SA in charge. I'd follow the advice of your attorney. If you are not happy with your attorney and can afford to, find another one.

Mark as helpful

4 lawyers agree

Posted

Eligibility for the safety does not require you to do a buy for the feds. That would make you a cooperator and perhaps eligible for a 5K1.1 substantial assistance downward departure, which is totally different from the safety valve. If they're telling you you have to do a buy, they are jerking you around, or else implying that they will claim to the judge that you haven't told them everything you know and should be denied the safety valve. Judges can make that call independently -- it's not up to the USAO, in my experience.

Mark as helpful

3 lawyers agree

1 comment

Asker

Posted

thanks, i'm starting to believe that may be whats going on.

Federal crime topics

Top tips from attorneys

What others are asking

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer

Browse all legal topics