j u s t c r i m

EJI Challenges Capital Murder Conviction and Life Without Parole Sentence of 16-Year-Old at U.S. Court of Appeals | Equal Justice Initiative

On March 4, 2011, EJI attorneys argued at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia, on behalf of an EJI client who is serving life imprisonment without parole after being convicted of capital murder in Alabama for an offense at age sixteen.

The federal appeals court requested oral argument on the issue of whether the Shelby County prosecutor illegally commented on the defendant's right not to testify at trial. The record shows that the prosecutor told the jury in closing argument that it should believe the State's key witness, who was an accomplice to the crime, because "there’s a witness that you heard from but he didn’t come in here and talk to you from this witness stand."

The defense attorney objected and moved for a mistrial, asserting: "Let the record reflect that the district attorney pointed straight at the defendant when he said that. That is the most direct comment on a defendant’s failure to testify I have ever seen."

via eji.org

Newt Gingrich and Pat Nolan - Prison reform: A smart way for states to save money and lives

We urge conservative legislators to lead the way in addressing an issue often considered off-limits to reform: prisons. Several states have recently shown that they can save on costs without compromising public safety by intelligently reducing their prison populations.

We joined with other conservative leaders last month to announce the Right on Crime Campaign, a national movement urging states to make sensible and proven reforms to our criminal justice system - policies that will cut prison costs while keeping the public safe. Among the prominent signatories are Reagan administration attorney general Ed Meese, former drug czar Asa Hutchinson, David Keene of the American Conservative Union, John Dilulio of the University of Pennsylvania, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform and Richard Viguerie of ConservativeHQ.com. We all agree that we can keep the public safe while spending fewer tax dollars if we spend them more effectively.

The Right on Crime Campaign represents a seismic shift in the legislative landscape. And it opens the way for a common-sense left-right agreement on an issue that has kept the parties apart for decades.

via www.washingtonpost.com

"All the Sara Kruzans deserve a chance"

LATIMES Editorial (January 4, 2011)):   "The controversial decision to shorten Esteban Nuñez's prison sentence has obscured a more important commutation that outgoing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger granted a young woman who has fought to turn her life around from its almost unbelievably bad beginning.

Sara Kruzan had been abused physically and sexually for most of her young life before she was gang raped, then pushed into a life of prostitution at age 13 by the neighborhood pimp. When she was 16, she robbed and killed the man, a crime for which she was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Sixteen years later, Kruzan has earned an associate's degree through the local community college, has participated in many of the prison's rehabilitation programs and has shown a level of growth and maturity that makes her a promising candidate for rejoining society. Schwarzenegger's decision to reduce her sentence to 25 years to life with the possibility of parole gives her a chance to do just that.

Schwarzenegger Commutes Sentence of Human Trafficking Victim | Criminal Justice | Change.org

No country outside the United States allows children to be sentenced to life without the chance of parole, a life behind bars without the chance of redemption. In California alone, around 275 children have received such a sentence, belying the right-wing caricature of the state as a bastion of unchecked bleeding-heart liberalism.

On Sunday, outgoing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) – set to be replaced today by the nominally liberal, prison guard-endorsed Jerry Brown (D) – granted clemency to one child whose story we've covered in-depth here at Change.org: Sara Kruzan.

Sara was sentenced to life without parole at 16 after she was convicted of killing the man who had raped and forced her into a life of prostitution three years earlier – when she was just 13. Now 33, Sara has spent more than half her life in a prison, where she has become both a model inmate and a poignant example of the evils of California's mass incarceration problem.

via criminaljustice.change.org

Juvenile Life Without Parole In California | "Support Freedom Of Trafficking Victim Sara Kruzan"

Change.org - "There are approximately 225 juveniles in California serving a life without parole sentence. California has the worst racial disparity rate in the nation for sentencing juveniles to life without parole.  Black youth are given this sentence at 22 times the rate of white youth.

A number of California cases have recently been highlighted in the media due to the background of the juveniles who received the sentences, and the circumstances surrounding their crimes. One such case involves Sara Kruzan, now 28. She was raised in Riverside by her abusive, drug-addicted mother.  Sara met her father only three times in her life because he was in prison.

Since the age of 9, Sara suffered from severe depression for which she was hospitalized several times.  At the age of 11, she met a 31-year-old man named G.G. who molested her and began grooming her to become a prostitute.  At age 13, she began working as a child prostitute for G.G. and was repeatedly molested by him. At age 16, Sara was convicted of killing him.  She was sentenced to prison for the rest of her life despite her background and a finding by the California Youth Authority that she was amendable to treatment offered in the juvenile system. (See video of Sara Kruzan).

“Life without parole means absolutely no opportunity for release,” said Senator Yee. (of California)  “It also means minors are often left without access to programs and rehabilitative services while in prison.  This sentence was created for the worst of criminals that have no possibility of reform and it is not a humane way to handle children.  While the crimes they committed caused undeniable suffering, these youth offenders are not the worst of the worst.”

“As a society we’ve learned a lot since the time we started using life without parole for children,” said Elizabeth Calvin, a children’s rights advocate with Human Rights Watch.  “We now know that this sentence provides no deterrent effect.  While children who commit serious crimes should be held accountable, public safety can be protected without subjecting youth to the harshest prison sentence possible.”

To email the Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, directly follow this link: http://gov.ca.gov/interact#email

 

"the longest time"

Try as i might to avoid linking to licensed content  -- justcrim's sub-title being "open access research" -- I will do so occasionally if a story, or article, or whatever, seems particularly worthy.  If you want to access this article, stop by a UC or CSU library.  Prison Journal is a Sage publication.  It will likely be available online. If you're a UC affiliate, authenticate and get it wherever you're @ ...

For the Longest Time: The Adjustment of Inmates to a Sentence of Life Without Parole

1. Margaret E. Leigey, PhD [email protected]

Using a triangulated research design, this research examines the mental health of life without parole (LWOP) inmates. A bivariate analysis of the mental health of two groups of LWOP inmates was conducted, new (n = 72) and veteran (n= 46). New LWOP inmates were defined as those who had served less than the mean number of years of the sample (10.5 years) while veteran LWOP inmates had served greater than the mean time served. Results indicate that the initial stages of incarceration are particularly stressful as a higher prevalence of new LWOP inmates reported mental health disorder than veteran LWOP inmates. Significant differences exist between the two groups in several areas. In-depth interviews with veteran LWOP inmates (n = 25) are further indicative of an inverse relationship between mental disorder and length of incarceration.

michigan l rev - first impressions - "redemption song: graham v. florida and the evolving eighth amendment jurisprudence"

Michigan Law Review - First Impressions - "Redemption Song: Graham v. Florida and the Evolving Eighth Amendment Jurisprudence"  (By Robert Smith & G. Ben Cohen) 

Introduction:

"In Graham v. Florida, [78 U.S.L.W. 4387 (2010)] the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits a sentence of life without parole ("LWOP") for a juvenile under eighteen who commits a non-homicide offense. For Terrance Graham, who committed home-invasion robbery at seventeen, the decision does not mean necessarily that he someday will leave the brick walls of Florida's Taylor Annex Correctional Institution. Unlike previous Eighth Amendment decisions, such as Roper v. Simmons, [543 U.S. 551 (2005)] where the Court barred the death penalty for juveniles, this new categorical rule does not translate into automatic relief for members of the exempted class: "A State need not guarantee the offender eventual release," Justice Kennedy wrote for the majority, "but if it imposes a sentence of life it must provide him or her with some realistic opportunity to obtain release before the end of that term." Graham offers the possibility of redemption but not its guarantee.

Pragmatists are understandably skeptical [States that have enacted prohibitions on parole for child offenders could simply convert statutory prohibitions into de jure limitations, by allowing parole under the law, but denying it indefinitely. An opportunity for parole that might be realistic in Washington D.C. could be completely unattainable before parole boards in Florida, California and Louisiana.].   Yet beyond the narrow application of this rule to the small class of child-offenders, Graham contains the ingredients to be of transformative significance to the Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. First, the opinion-employing a method of comparative analysis typically reserved for its capital cases-cements a proportionality requirement in the Court's non-capital Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. Second, the Court uses for the first time a method of constitutional elucidation that draws two separate and seemingly parallel lines of jurisprudence together to articulate an independent constitutional principle. Third, the Court articulates the "possibility of redemption" as an essential consideration arising from evolving standards of decency. These three components-proportionality, constitutional triangulation, and the notion that people and their propensities are not static-suggest that Graham could have far greater significance in the life of the law than in the life of child defendants toiling, for instance, in the fields of the Florida Penitentiary,. [Graham is one of 72 juveniles sentenced to LWOP in Florida.]..."

GRAHAM v. FLORIDA ( No. 08-7412 )

GRAHAM v. FLORIDA ( No. 08-7412 ) - Kennedy, J.,  delivered the opinion of the Court, in which  Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer,  and  Sotomayor, JJ.,  joined.  Stevens, J.,  filed a concurring opinion, in which  Ginsburg  and  Sotomayor, JJ.,  joined.  Roberts, C. J.,  filed an opinion concurring in the judgment.  Thomas, J.,  filed a dissenting opinion, in which  Scalia, J.,  joined, and in which  Alito, J.,  joined as to Parts I and III.  Alito, J.  , filed a dissenting opinion. 

SCOTUS Syllabus: Petitioner Graham was 16 when he committed armed burglary and another crime. Under a plea agreement, the Florida trial court sentenced Graham to probation and withheld adjudication of guilt. Subsequently, the trial court found that Graham had violated the terms of his probation by committing additional crimes. The trial court adjudicated Graham guilty of the earlier charges, revoked his probation, and sentenced him to   life in prison for the burglary. Because Florida has abolished its parole system, the life sentence left Graham no possibility of release except executive clemency. He challenged his sentence under the Eighth Amendment ’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, but the State First District Court of Appeal affirmed.

Held:  The [Eighth Amendment ’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments] Clause does not permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in prison without parole for a non homicide crime. [emphasis added]

GRAHAM v. FLORIDA ( No. 08-7412 ) - Decision and Syllabus at LII / Legal Information Institute

GRAHAM v. FLORIDA ( No. 08-7412) - Background at ScotusWiki

http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Graham_v._Florida#Decision

SCOTUS sentencing decisions released

I join the thousands of blogs and news outlets breaking ....

news

Supreme Court: Sex offenders can be kept in prison

[MSNBC] Justices rule that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered "sexually dangerous" after their prison terms are complete.

 & --Justices ban life terms in some teen cases

l . w . o . p .

The Other Death Penalty Project Announces Letter-Writing Campaign to Anti-Death Penalty Groups
LANCASTER, Calif., Feb. 22 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

"Today, thousands of prisoners around the country will be mailing letters to numerous death penalty abolitionist groups asking them to stop advocating for life without the possibility of parole as a supposedly humane alternative to lethal injection.

The Other Death Penalty Project, a group comprised solely of prisoners serving life without possibility of parole -- the other death penalty -- categorically rejects this hypocritical position taken by too many death penalty abolitionists. Death at the hands of the state, whether by lethal injection or lethal imprisonment, is the death penalty.

The Other Death Penalty Project, similarly, rejects the proposition that life without the possibility of parole is a necessary first step toward ultimate abolition of the death penalty. The distinction is one of method, not kind. Instead of moving to the elimination of death sentences, this tactic of trading slow executions for quick executions has resulted  in an explosion of men and women sentenced to the slower method.

As a study published in the Harvard Law Review in 2006 entitled "A Matter of Life and Death" concluded, "The purpose of this Note…is to argue that [L.W.O.P.] statutes are neither a necessary nor a particularly useful step toward eliminating the death penalty."