Submitted by crinadmin on
On a bipartisan 23-15 vote, the California Senate has approved legislation that would allow courts to review cases of juveniles sentenced to life without parole after 10 years, potentially allowing some individuals to receive a new sentence of 25 years to life. Senate Bill 399, or the Fair Sentencing for Youth Act, “recognises that children have a greater capacity for rehabilitation than adults,” said Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) in a statement released by his office. “The neuroscience is clear; brain maturation continues well through adolescence and thus impulse control, planning, and critical thinking skills are still not yet fully developed. SB 399 reflects that science and provides the opportunity for compassion and rehabilitation that we should exercise with minors,” said Yee, the bill’s author who is also child psychologist. The US Supreme Court, in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), confirmed that minors need to be considered differently than adults in sentencing. The ruling prohibited the death penalty for children due to concerns about brain development. While there are more than 250 youth who were under the age of 18 years old when they committed crimes and were sentenced to life without parole in California, there is not a single juvenile sentenced to life without parole outside of the US. Prohibited by international law and norms, no other country in the world imposes this sentence on youth. A recent report published by Human Rights Watch found that in many cases where juveniles were prosecuted with an adult for the same offence, the youth received heavier sentences than their adult co-defendants. “Sentencing children to life without parole means they will die in prison,” said Elizabeth Calvin, children’s rights advocate at Human Rights Watch. “The public can be kept safe without locking children up forever for crimes committed when they were still considered too young to have the judgment to vote or drive,” she said. Despite popular belief to the contrary, Human Rights Watch found that life without parole is not reserved for children who commit the worst crimes or who show signs of being irredeemable criminals. Nationally, it is estimated that 59 per cent of youth sentenced to life without parole had no prior criminal convictions. Forty-five per cent of California youth sentenced to life without parole for involvement in a murder did not actually kill the victim. Many were convicted of felony murder, or for aiding and abetting the murder, because they acted as lookouts or were participating in another felony, such as a robbery, when the murder took place. Of the approximately 250 youth in California serving this sentence, there are a high number of cases that have brought into question this severe sentencing. One such case involves Anthony C., who was 16 and had never before been in trouble with the law. Anthony belonged to a “tagging crew” that paints graffiti. One day Anthony and his friend James went down to a wash (a cement-sided stream bed) to graffiti. James revealed to Anthony that he had a gun in his backpack and when another group of kids came down to the wash, James decided to rob them. James pulled out the gun, and the victim told him, “If you don’t kill me, I’ll kill you.” At that point, Anthony thought the bluff had been called, and turned to pick up his bike. James shot the other kid. The police told Anthony’s parents that he did not need a lawyer. He was interviewed by the police and released, but later re-arrested on robbery and murder charges. Anthony was offered a 16-to-life sentence before trial if he pleaded, but he refused, believing he was innocent. Anthony was found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Charged with aiding and abetting, he was held responsible for the actions of James. Another case involves Sara Kruzan, who was raised in Riverside by her mother who was abusive and addicted to drugs. Sarah was very vulnerable, and at age 11, a man began grooming her to become a prostitute. Soon after meeting her, he sexually assaulted her, and at 13 years old she began working as a prostitute for him. At age 16 she killed him, and for this crime was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, despite the California Youth Authority and a psychiatric evaluation determining that she was amendable to rehabilitation. “Life without parole means absolutely no opportunity for release,” said Yee. “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.” Nationally, 11 jurisdictions have prohibited this sentence including New York, Colorado, and the District of Columbia. Other states are considering reforms or have efforts underway to eliminate the sentence, including Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, and Washington. The oldest human rights treaty to which the US is a party, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, prohibits this sentence. California also has the worst record in the nation for racial disparity in the imposition of life without parole for juveniles. African American youth are serving the sentence at a rate that is 18 times higher than the rate for white youth, and the rate for Hispanic youth is five times higher. Since 1990, California has spent between $66 million and $83 million on incarcerating youth offenders sentenced to life without parole. To continue incarcerating the current population of youth offenders already sentenced to life without parole until their deaths in prison will cost the state approximately $500 million. Each new youth offender given this sentence will cost the state upwards of $2.5 million. SB 399 will next be considered by the State Assembly.
Further information