Comprehensive Crime Control Act

The Law: Federal legislation that selectively overhauled the federal criminal code

Date: Became law on October 19, 1984

Significance: This act expanded the government’s law-enforcement power and emphasized the rights of the public over those of the criminal or accused criminal.

Work on this legislation began in the 1970s in a Democratic-controlled Senate. Passage of the bill (by a vote of 94 to 1) reflected close cooperation between Democrat Edward Kennedy and Republican Strom Thurmond. Democrats in the House of Representatives were less cooperative because they wanted a more piecemeal approach to the revision of the federal criminal code than the major recodification supported in the Senate. Thus a collection of procedural and substantive crime proposals were made instead of a systematic overhaul.

Fearing that the Democratic House leadership would block passage of the proposals, Republican Dan Lungren moved to add the crime proposals to an unrelated resolution on continuing appropriations, which would require urgent consideration on the House floor in order to keep the government in operation. Facing reelection in November 1984, congressional Democrats voted in favor of law and order rather than explain a recorded “no” vote to their constituents. When the joint appropriations resolution emerged from the House, it had tacked to it a Title XI: the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.

For the first time, federal judges could detain repeat offenders in preventive detention, without bail, before trial. They could also detain individuals accused of certain major crimes if they were deemed dangerous to the community. In the past, bail was granted unless there was reason to believe the defendant would flee. Moreover, if the detained defendant were later acquitted or the charges dismissed, no recompense would be given for the time spent in jail awaiting trial.

Under the act, federal judges follow a system of guidelines in imposing sentences. The guidelines, established by a presidentially appointed sentencing commission, eliminate disparities in sentences for the same crimes and dismantle the early-release parole system. Under the guidelines, federal prosecutors are able to select charges that carry the likelihood of the longest sentence. Judges are required to explain in writing any departure from the guidelines, while both prosecutors and defendants are entitled to appeal sentences that depart from the standard.

The act also restricts the use of insanity as a defense to individuals who are unable to understand the nature and wrongfulness of their acts. The law prevents expert testimony on the ultimate issue of whether the defendant has a particular mental state or condition. It shifts the burden of proof from prosecutors, who formerly had to prove that defendants were not insane, to the defendants, who must prove that they are. This change in the insanity defense was a direct response to the John Hinckley Jr. case. Hinckley’s lawyer proved that Hinckley was psychotic and depressed. The jury found him not guilty because of insanity in the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981.

Finally, the legislation allows the government to seize profits and assets, including real estate, that are used in organized crime enterprises such as drug trafficking.

Bibliography

Calder, James D. The Origins and Development of Federal Crime Control Policy. Westport: Praeger, 1993.

Federal Criminal Code and Rules. St. Paul: West, 2003. Print.

Lyman, Michael D., and Gary W. Potter. Organized Crime. Boston: Pearson, 2015. Print.

Marion, Nancy E. A History of Federal Crime Control Initiatives, 1960-1993. Westport: Praeger. Print.