How is it constitutionally possible that for the same crime one person gets 1 year in state, but another one-6 years in federal?

Because the person has actually violated a crime in two different jurisdictions. And generally, the federal government will not prosecute concurrently unless the person was not punished that severely in State court.

I suspect that is the case here.

I agree with my colleague, the investigator does not decide which jurisdiction the case gets prosecuted in, although he can make an intial submission of the case depending on the facts of a particular case. In essence, the prosecuting authority can be in either the State or Federal system, with the decision to keep the case in the federal courts being made by the US Atty Office, not the investigator. Once the feds decide to prosecute, the sentencing range applicable to those crimes in federal court apply. Respectfully, the decision by the feds to prosecute has nothing to do with 'equal protection'. Good luck.

DISCLAIMER I do not practice law in your State. This answer is provided solely for informational purposes only. This answer does not constitute legal advice, create an attorney-client relationship, or constitute attorney advertising.

I remember as a new lawyer figuring this out, strangely something that did not seem obvious in the law school setting. It happens all the time, and I totally agree that it is outrageous. These two systems act absolutely independantly from each other. Federal sentences are almost always longer for the same crimes.

The equal protections clause does not apply to the criminal justice system in that the constitution does not require co-defendants to be charged and sentenced equally. There will always be a struggle between "treating everyone the same" (which sometimes hurts the defendant, when there are minimum mandatory sentences, or the guidelines call for harsh sentencs) are receiving "individualized justice" taking into account everything an attorney is allowed to present the court about a defendant before the court passes sentence. Certainly, on it's face, the two different sentences will raise a lot of eyebrows, but a lot more goes into the sentencing decision than just the statute someone gets charged under (although of course it is a big consideration on both the federal and Florida sentencing guidelines).

As far as the executive branch's discretion into when, if, and where to bring charges, you will also not find any relief in the equal protections clause. However, there's always the news media, and the voting booth (State Attorney hires State Attorney investigators, the Mayor appoints police chiefs, and the Sheriff assigns Detectives).

I think my first question would be the next biggest consideration under the scoresheets, what were their respective criminal histories? And so on and so forth.