Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Consulting

In May 17, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Graham v. Florida that sentencing Florida juveniles to life in prison without parole for crimes less than murder was unconstitutional.  Graham v. Florida was the first time the court had applied the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment” to anything other than the death penalty. In its ruling, the Supreme Court declared that juveniles were ineligible for life without parole because they were different than adults who committed the same crime. They were not yet fully developed human beings mentally, emotionally and physiologically. The parts of the teenage brain that rule impulse, the ability to think ahead, the understanding of consequences, is not yet fully formed.

The justices made a distinction between teens who commit crimes as part of their “transient immaturity” and those who are permanently “incorrigible.” The decision as to whether a juvenile criminal is one or the other can’t be made while they are still teenagers, but it can be determined after they’ve fully matured, the court said in its 6-3 ruling.

The court’s ruling meant juveniles who were sentenced to life without parole for crimes such as armed robbery, assault, rape and attempted murder needed to be resentenced. Of the dozens of juveniles serving life sentences in the United States at the time of the Graham decision, more than half of them were in Florida.

Barry University law professor, Gerry Glynn, established the Juvenile Life Without Parole Defense Resource Center  in June 2010,  to coordinate efforts to represent the Florida inmates who were sentenced as juveniles to life without parole.  There are 115 cases of juveniles sentenced to life in Florida, and the cases are extremely complex.

In preparing for a resentencing hearing, the defense resource center must help attorneys tell judges about three important aspects of the inmate: the life of the juvenile before the crime, the crime itself and the inmate’s life behind bars.Attorneys must be able to show the dangerous juvenile who committed the crime has changed inside prison into a mature, reformed adult. They must explain why the juvenile committed the crime and why that same person, years later, is no longer a threat to society

Juveniles convicted of serious crimes must be given a “second look” after they have achieved full maturity to determine whether they have outgrown the impulsive, thoughtless, risky behavior typical of teenagers — or whether they remain dangers to society. One way to determine whether that change has taken place, the court ruled, is to see whether juvenile inmates took advantage of education, vocational and rehabilitative opportunities while in prison. However, the problem for inmates sentenced to life in Florida is that they do not have access to educational and vocational programs, since the Department of Corrections gives priority to those inmates who are within 3 years of being released.

There aresome inmates who, having  no chance of release, have engaged in self-motivated rehabilitation. For example, a  41-year-old Hillsborough inmate sentenced to life without parole at 17 for attempted murder and sexual battery in 1989 has completed 20 self-improvement programs, including three he created himself.

Gainesville State Attorney Bill Cervone argues that the relatively small number of juveniles sentenced to life without parole reflects the atrocity of their crimes and their continued threat to public safety. He believes that the crimes they committed are very serious  and that these behaviors indicate the risk they pose to the community.

Those who support the Supreme Court decision agree that there are people in prison who committed crimes at 16 who will continue to be a danger to society later, but that each youth deserves the chance to be evaluated.

Thus far,  a handful of Graham-eligible inmates have been resentenced under the court’s ruling, and none has been released from prison. The resentences vary from 30 years to 107 years. No one has been resentenced yet in Central Florida courts, but among those who are eligible is Michael S. Johnson, who was 16 in 2005 when he and two others kidnapped, robbed and raped two women.

In a similar case in St. Petersburg, Jose Walle was 13 when he participated with two others in the kidnapping, robbing and raping of two waitresses. In November 2010, Walle was resentenced to 65 years by a judge who rejected the Supreme Court’s opinion that life without parole for juveniles was cruel and unusual.  Walle, now 16, will begin serving his 65 year sentence after completing 27 years for another Pinellas County rape. Under the consecutive sentences, Walle will be eligible for release when he is 91. His attorneys say they will appeal the sentence as violating the intent of the Graham decision.

Read more in the article by Jeff Kunerth, Orlando Sentinel

orlandosentinel.com/news/local/crime/os-life-without-parole-barry-20110402,0,5418922.story

Comments are closed.