Crime

Supreme Court Says Prisoners Can Seek Parole Who Were Sentenced to Life as Juveniles

Published

9 years ago

January 28, 2016

David G. Savage, L.A. Times

The Supreme Court opened the door Monday to possible parole for hundreds of aging prisoners across the nation who are serving life terms for homicides committed when they were under age 18.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices said these prisoners can take advantage of an earlier ruling that called it cruel and unusual punishment to send a juvenile criminal to life in prison with no chance for parole.

Since then, California and most other states have given such prisoners a new sentence or provided them with a right to seek parole. But several states, including Michigan, Pennsylvania and Louisiana, have refused to reopen these old cases.

Monday’s decision gave new hope to a 69-year old Louisiana inmate who shot and killed a police officer in Baton Rouge in November 1963, days before President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. Henry Montgomery was 17 then and was sentenced to life in prison with no chance for parole.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has played the key role in a series of decisions that have restored the principle that young offenders should not be treated the same as hardened adult criminals.

In Monday’s opinion, he said these prisoners do not have an automatic right to go free, but they do have a right to a parole hearing or a new sentence that limits their prison terms.

Henry Montgomery has spent each day of the past 46 years knowing he was condemned to die in prison,” Kennedy said. “Perhaps it can be established that, due to exceptional circumstances, this fate was a just and proportionate punishment for the crime he committed as a 17-year-old boy.”

But “children are constitutionally different from adults in their level of culpability,” and “prisoners like Montgomery must be given the opportunity to show their crime did not reflect irreparable corruption, and if it did not, their hope for some years outside prison walls must be restored.”

His opinion in Montgomery vs. Louisiana was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Kennedy spoke for the court in 2005 when the justices abolished the death penalty for juvenile murderers, and again in 2010 when life terms for juvenile offenders, except for those convicted of murder, were deemed cruel and unusual punishment.

Four years ago, the court in an Alabama case said that even young offenders convicted of homicide should be rarely, if ever, sentenced to a life term with no chance for parole. But at the time, the court did not say whether its ruling must apply retroactively to old cases, the issue that was resolved Monday.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., who disagreed with the earlier rulings, dissented on Monday.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Related Topics:juveniles life in prison Mass Incarceration

Up Next

Mayor, City Administrator, City Council Still Failing to Implement “Fair and Consistent” Police Discipline

Don't Miss

Barack Obama: Why we must rethink solitary confinement

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of April 2 – 8, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of April 2 – 8, 2025

Published

1 week ago

April 4, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of March 28 – April 1, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of March 28 – April 1, 2025

Published

2 weeks ago

March 28, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Group Takes First Steps to Recall District Attorney Diana Becton

The group, called “Recall Diana Becton,” says they have lost faith in her prosecution decisions and her lack of transparency. On their social media post, they say: “We the victims of crime, their families, local business owners and employees, as well as residents of Contra Costa County, have reached our limit and are initiating the recall of District Attorney Diana Becton,” the notice states. “We are increasingly concerned about the persistent cycle of unaddressed criminal activity. We are frustrated by her continuous empty promises to victims and their families that justice will prevail while she permits criminals to roam free.” Becton, 73, is a former judge who was appointed district attorney in 2017 by the Board of Supervisors and then won election in 2018 and again in 2022.

Published

3 weeks ago

March 24, 2025

Oakland Post

Diana Becton has served at the Contra Costa County District Attorney since 2017. Richmond Standard photo.

By Post Staff

After gathering more than 100 verified signatures, a group led by crime victims delivered a ‘notice of intent’ to the offices of Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton seeking her recall.

The group, called “Recall Diana Becton,” says they have lost faith in her prosecution decisions and her lack of transparency.

On their social media post, they say:

“We the victims of crime, their families, local business owners and employees, as well as residents of Contra Costa County, have reached our limit and are initiating the recall of District Attorney Diana Becton,” the notice states.

“We are increasingly concerned about the persistent cycle of unaddressed criminal activity. We are frustrated by her continuous empty promises to victims and their families that justice will prevail while she permits criminals to roam free.”

Becton, 73, is a former judge who was appointed district attorney in 2017 by the Board of Supervisors and then won election in 2018 and again in 2022.

Becton has seven days to respond. According to the East Bay Times, her office spokesperson said her “answer will be her public comment.”

After Becton responds, according to the Contra Costa County Elections Office, Recall Diana Becton must then finalize the petition language and gather signatures of a minimum of 10% of registered voters (72,000) in 160 days before it can go on the ballot for election.

She is the third Bay Area district attorney whose constituents wanted them removed from office. San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin was removed from office in 2021 and last year, Pamela Price lost her position in a recall election.

Of the top 10 proponents of Becton’s recall, three are the families of Alexis Gabe, Thomas Arellano, and Damond Lazenby Jr.

In each of those cases, the families say Becton failed to pursue prosecution, allowed a plea deal instead of a trial in a slaying and questioned the coroner’s report in a fatal car crash.

Some political science experts suggest that, in the Bay Area there may be a bit of copycat syndrome going on.

In many states, recalls are not permitted at all, but in California, not only are they permitted but the ability to put one into motion is easy.

“Only 10% of registered voters in a district are needed just to start the process of getting the effort onto the ballot,” Garrick Percival, a political science professor told the East Bay Times. “It makes it easy to make the attempt.”

But according to their website, the Recall Diana Becton group express their loss of faith in the prosecutor.

“Her lack of transparency regarding crime in this county, and her attempts to keep her offenders out of jail have left us disheartened,” the recall group wrote.

Petitioners say they are acting not just for themselves but other crime victims “who feel ignored, exasperated and hopeless in their pursuit of justice for themselves or their loved ones.”

KRON TV, The East Bay Times, and Wikipedia are the sources for this report.