New York University Skip to Content Skip to Search Skip to Navigation Skip to Sub Navigation

Supreme Court of the United States Grants Cert in Case in which Law School’s Center on the Administration of Criminal Law Filed First Amicus Brief

November 18, 2008
N-167, 2008-09

The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in a case in which New York University School of Law’s Center on the Administration of Criminal Law filed its first amicus curiae brief. The Court will review a lower court’s ruling in U.S. v. Abuelhawa, in which petitioner Salman Khade Abuelhawa was convicted under a federal statute for using his cell phone to purchase drugs for personal use, conduct the statute was not intended to reach.

The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit deepens an acknowledged conflict among the circuits concerning the proper interpretation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b), which makes it unlawful to use a communications device to facilitate the commission of any act constituting a felony under the federal drug laws.

The Fourth Circuit affirmed Abuelhawa’s conviction in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, reasoning that the crime facilitated by petitioner’s use of his cell phone was not the purchase of drugs for personal use, a misdemeanor, but was the seller’s distribution of the drugs, a felony.

“The Center is thrilled the Court will hear a case that typifies one of our core missions: to intervene in cases where prosecutors’ overly aggressive exercise of discretion in charging leads to errors of law,” said Anthony Barkow, who is the Center’s executive director and who was a federal prosecutor for 12 years. “As the Center’s brief makes plain, prosecutors should not use their substantial discretion to prosecute a crime that Congress never intended.”

Three courts of appeals hold that Section 843(b) does not reach the use of a telephone to purchase drugs for personal use, while two courts of appeals - including the court of appeals in this case - have now reached the opposite conclusion.

In this case, Abuelhawa was charged with seven counts of violating Section 843(b) for using a telephone to arrange at most two meeting to purchase drugs. Thus, instead of the maximum two years imprisonment he faced on two misdemeanor counts of simple possession, he was instead subject to seven felony convictions totaling 28 years in prison, and deportation.

“If the charging theory, which is very aggressive, and the lower court’s reading of this statute are left standing, the statute will sweep within it a huge number of new defendants,” Barkow said. “Basically, anyone who buys drugs using a telephone could be prosecuted as a felon.”

“The lower court’s decision eviscerates the clear statutory distinction between distributors and purchasers, elides the basic concerns that gave rise to Section 843(b) in the first place, and will have a fundamental and unwarranted impact upon the exercise of prosecutorial discretion and the criminal justice process more generally,” the brief stated.

Barkow, along with the Center’s faculty director, NYU School of Law Professor Rachel Barkow, prepared the brief in partnership with the law firm of Davis Polk & Wardwell.

Oral arguments in the case are expected to take in March 2009.

Reporter Contact: Anthony Barkow
Executive Director, Center on the Administration of Criminal Law NYU School of Law
212.998.6612
anthony.barkow@nyu.edu
www.prosecutioncenter.org

        

EDITORS NOTE
The Center on the Administration of Criminal Law at New York University School of Law is an apolitical organization dedicated to defining good government practices in criminal prosecutions through academic research, litigation, and participation in the formulation of public policy. The Center is committed to identifying the best prosecutorial practices and suggesting avenues of reform. The Center’s litigation practice aims to use its empirical research and experience with criminal justice to assist in important criminal justice cases at all levels, concentrating on cases in which exercises of prosecutorial discretion raise significant substantive legal issues.

This Press Release is in the following Topics:
School of Law, Research

Type: Press Release

Press Contact: Michael Orey | (914) 340-5555


Search News



NYU In the News

Entrepreneurship Lab Opens at NYU

Crain’s New York Business covered the opening of the Mark and Debra Leslie Entrepreneurial eLab, which will be the headquarters for NYU’s Entrepreneurial Institute and all of the University’s programs aimed at promoting innovation and startups.

A Globalizer for N.Y.U. in Abu Dhabi

The New York Times profiled Bill Bragin who will become the first executive artistic director of NYU Abu Dhabi’s new performing arts center.

Think Tank to Ponder a Future for Ballet

The New York Times profiled Jennifer Homans, the director of NYU’s new Center for Ballet and the Arts.

The Brilliant Ten: Jonathan Viventi Builds Devices That Decode Thoughts

Popular Science named Assistant Bioengineering Professor Jonathan Viventi as one of its “brilliant ten” for his research into brain implants that could one day halt epileptic episodes:

Living and Leaving the Dream: Adrian Cardenas’ Journey from the Major Leagues to College

The New York Times ran a feature on Adrian Cardenas, a former major league baseball player who is now studying philosophy and creating writing at NYU.

NYU Footer