U.S. Supreme Court to review issue of juvenile `lifers'

Lawyers for two Florida men who were sentenced to life without parole as juveniles will argue to the U.S. Supreme Court Monday that the penalty is cruel and unusual.

With those words, a deeply divided U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 declared that the execution of adolescents was cruel and unusual punishment, and, hence, a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling halted capital punishment for juveniles in 25 states.

On Monday, the lawyers for two Florida men who, as juveniles, were sentenced to life without parole for nonhomicides will ask the nation's highest court to declare the practice of incarcerating juveniles for the rest of their lives cruel and unusual, as well.

The Supreme Court will hold oral arguments on the two cases:. The case of Terrance Jamar Graham, convicted of armed robbery in Duval County, will be heard first at 10 a.m.; the appeal of Joe Sullivan, a convicted rapist from Pensacola, will be heard an hour later.

``What's at stake is that we have children who will die in prison because they have no right to parole, and there is no other option,'' said Paolo Annino, a Florida State University law professor who has been researching juvenile lifers for more than a decade. ``What's at stake is life and death.''

But for prosecutors, and some judges, the penultimate penalty of lifelong imprisonment is an important part of the nation's criminal justice tool box -- even for kids.

``Sentencing a juvenile to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is a weighty matter. Prosecutors do not seek such punishment lightly, nor do courts impose it without careful consideration,'' the National District Attorneys Association wrote in a ``friend of the court'' brief.

``But youthful offenders sometimes commit heinous crimes -- rapes, kidnappings, and violent robberies and assaults that may leave the victim maimed for life, or worse.''

For almost two decades, lawmakers and state juvenile justice administrators have mounted an unprecedented assault on youthful offenders -- prosecuting teens in adult court, sending them to military-style boot camps and imposing long sentences as their weapons.

In the past couple of years, however, children's advocates and some state corrections administrators -- spurred by a series of scandalous deaths involving imprisoned Florida juveniles -- have questioned whether the laws and policies went too far.

``We must strike the balance between providing for public safety, and providing opportunities for young people to learn from behaviors and receive the treatment and rehabilitation services needed to become productive members of their families and their communities,'' the state's 2008 Blueprint Commission on Juvenile Justice wrote.

It's not surprising that the challenge to life imprisonment for juveniles would come from Florida. The overwhelming number of men serving life sentences for crimes committed when they were teens are in Florida prisons.

Of 109 prisoners across the United States serving life sentences for crimes committed when they were juveniles, 76 are in Florida, according to Annino's research at Florida State University's Public Interest Law Center. A 77th inmate, Travis Underhill, sentenced in Broward County to life on an armed robbery, collapsed while playing basketball at a Palm Beach County prison on Oct. 8 and died.

Of the 76, eight were sentenced in Miami-Dade, and another eight were sentenced in Broward. Among the South Florida lifers:

• Thomas Rolle, who was a gunman in the botched, bloody robbery at Prince's Bar-B-Que Pit in Brownsville after Christmas in 1995. Rolle, 16 at the time of the robbery, was sentenced to 40 years on three counts of second-degree murder stemming from the robbery, but was given life imprisonment for the robbery.

• Milton Collier, who, at age 17, donned a mask when he robbed two women at gunpoint in southwest Miami-Dade in February 1995. After being spotted by a then-Metro-Dade police officer, Collier and an accomplice sped off, ramming into two cars before crashing. He is at the North West Florida Reception Center.

• Alain Troche, who was charged, at age 17, with nine counts of kidnapping and another two counts of armed robbery and burglary, violated his parole in May 1999 when he tried to rob a Tamarac man and his 8-year-old son in the man's garage. Prosecutors tacked on new robbery and burglary charges. He is being held at Polk Correctional Institution.

Not really, former U.S. Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming wrote in a ``friend of the court'' brief to the Supreme Court.

Six-foot-seven-inches tall, and with the build of a defensive lineman -- he later played for the University of Wyoming -- Simpson was arrested in Laramie after a night of mayhem that included arson, destruction of federal property, and assaulting a police officer. He since concluded: ``I was a monster.''

``I am not a bleeding heart,'' the Republican, who served in the Senate from 1978 through 1996, told The Miami Herald. ``I believe in capital punishment, and think it is perfectly appropriate.''

``I'm 78 years old. I've gone through the shifts and changes in life everyone goes through. I was rebellious, arrogant and stupid.'' But after spending a night in jail, Simpson matured quickly, he said. ``Those are horrible things they did, and I don't defend them. But when a guy gets to be 30 or 40, you should reopen the file and look at it.''

But Abe Laeser, a retired 36-year Miami-Dade prosecutor, said, ``There are some really bad people out there,'' and added: ``Just because you are six months or 10 months from reaching the magic age of 18, doesn't change the fact you are essentially a broken toy at this point -- and you are not going to get fixed.''

Some juveniles, Laeser said, simply have no empathy -- and no amount of time is going to help them develop it. ``These are scary guys. And they're going to be scary in 10 years, 20 years, and 30 years.''

Florida's -- and, indeed, the nation's -- crackdown on youth crime largely began a few hours before dawn on Sept. 15, 1993, when four teenagers, intent on robbery, shot two British tourists at a rest stop on Interstate 10 in Monticello. Margaret Ann Jagger, then 35, survived her injuries, her boyfriend, Gary Colley, 34, did not.

Industry leaders feared the killing -- one of nine involving tourists during a one-year period -- would deal a crippling blow to Florida's critical tourism efforts.

At the same time, experts on youth crime were predicting an onslaught of ``superpredators'' -- described as ``radically impulsive, brutally remorseless youngsters'' who would menace the nation's cities with a wave of rape, robbery and killing.

``Florida's problem was particularly dire, compromising the safety of residents, visitors, and international tourists, and threatening the state's bedrock tourism industry,'' the state wrote in a brief to the high court. ``During these years, many Americans considered the criminal justice system too easy on violent juvenile offenders and demanded reform.''

They got it. In 1993, then-Gov. Lawton Chiles convened two legislative sessions to combat violent crime; one session specifically looked at juveniles. ``It is widely recognized,'' Chiles said, ``that juvenile crime has become the greatest single crime problem in America today.''

The result was the 1994 Juvenile Justice Act, which gave Florida judges greater discretion to sentence teens as adults, and a series of other laws requiring offenders to serve at least 85 percent of their prison terms and serve enhanced sentences as repeat offenders.

The measures worked, prosecutors say in court documents. Juvenile crime in Florida declined by 30 percent in the decade from 1994 to 2004, mirroring a nationwide trend that saw violent crime by juveniles aged 12-17 decrease by 61 percent from 1993 to 2005.

Others view the law-and-order measures as only one ingredient in a complex stew.

``Getting tough on crime was probably one of the factors,'' said FSU criminal justice professor Dan Mears, who worked for three years with delinquent youth in Texas. Other factors almost certainly include a dramatic improvement in the economy, the decline of crack cocaine in the cities, the development of teen courts and the rise in drug treatment and mental health services for at-risk kids, he said.

Today, the state imprisons 5,500 juveniles, or 285 per 100,000 of Florida's under-18 population, at any given time -- ``well in excess of national norms,'' the 2008 DJJ blueprint report says.

Though it is arguable whether life imprisonment is ``cruel'' under the Constitution's Eighth Amendment, a life sentence is ``truly and extremely unusual, and becoming more so every year,'' lawyers for Sullivan, who is now 33, wrote in pleadings to the court.

``Only two 13-year-olds currently are sentenced to [life] for non-homicides in the United States, and Joe is one of only eight 13-year-old sentenced to die in prison for any crime. It has been more than 14 years since such a sentence was imposed for a non-homicide,'' the lawyers wrote.

All of the 13- and 14-year-olds serving life terms without parole in Florida are African-American. And more than eight in 10 -- or 84 percent -- of all juvenile lifers who did not commit murder are black.

In his petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, Sullivan cited the ``freakishly rare'' imposition of life sentences on 13-year-olds who did not kill as evidence of a ``national consensus'' opposed to such a punishment.

But 19 states wrote a ``friend of the court'' brief to the high court, arguing that they must be given the ability to imprison even juveniles for life when their crimes are are ``so morally reprehensible, so damaging to victims, and so undermine a community's sense of security.''

The brief was signed by the attorneys general of Louisiana, Alabama, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming.

``It is a rare and agonizing decision to sentence a juvenile to life-without-parole,'' the states wrote. ``But rare does not mean unconstitutional.''

Frankly this should be left up to the states. They are best suited for deciding the punishment of said crimes. Having said that, I do not believe a 13 year old, or even a 15 year old should be tried as an adult. That does not mean that there shouldn't be tough sentencing. I give serious pause to the convicted and the future community at large.

Sending a child, who has not fully developed, granted the crime may be horrific, but to effectively end life to one who's brain is still developing I would say legislature's need to step up with common sence sentencing, work on rehabilitation and give a sentence a kid can strive for.

I offer these thoughts as a crime victim survivor, I want all our neighborhoods safe, but, if we are going to sentence a juvinile to life at 13 what is the point?

Of course this case has larger ramification's and it includes the EU, will update as I gather the info.

Heartwood, again, violent or not 13 seems young, that doesn’t mean the punishment shouldn’t be stiff 15 years, with aggressive rehab, what the states choose, I just think if we are going toss them in at 13, LWOP, than what is the point, it should have been death.

Again, punishment is important, the juvinile system is about prevention, punishment and rehabilitation. Two out of three is acceptable.

You ask a valid question and it is difficult to come to terms with but one worthy of an intellectual conversation.

~FMC

FMC: “Frankly this should be left up to the states.”

Yep. Each state has authority under the US Constitution (unless usurped by the SCOTUS) to make these types of decisions for itself.

FMC: “...I do not believe a 13 year old, or even a 15 year old should be tried as an adult.”

Agreed. Right or wrong, the states have the legal right to decide, as they have to live with the results of their decisions. However, the SCOTUS is wiser than us. All bow in deference to the all knowing justices.

The terrible thing is, I’m not sure that a 13 y.o killer or rapist with a history of violence can be redeemed. If he has been born or raised without empathy and takes what he wants as if by right whatever it costs others, acts impulsively, is quick to anger, likes cruelty, it may be too late for him.

How do you teach love and decency in prison, and how can you tell a woman who was raped or the family of someone who was murdered, that the young criminal is being sent to learn love and decency, to live in a place where kindness is possible if he just follows the rules?

In some parts of the world, child soldiers are being treated and re-integrated into their communities. It would be good to know what becomes of these young men and how they act.

It just creates many work projects for social workers and psychologists. Sounds so noble, but impossible in reality. On the other hand, if they volunteer for hardened felon's next victim, I won't stop them. If it is their way to make themselves saints, solidifying moral superiority, they should do on their own, not wasting taxpayer's money, media bandwidth, and papers of academic journal where oh so lofty minded treatises will be written. As for this kind of moral superiority trip, legal professions are the worst. They try to make themselves better human beings by indulging in this kind of project and let hardened felons get free. Usually it is the others who get the brunt of their crime. Not so smart to argue eloquently for the merit of their project.

There are many ways to redemption, but using hardened criminals to prove that their redemption trip is so much better is no more than a human sacrifice. It will be criminal's future victims who will be sacrificed for their cause.

I take issue with you and I believe that the entire Bill of Rights should apply against the States as well as the federal government. Perhaps this is support for an “activist” SCOTUS, but I have to say that liberty demands it.

Since you believe that the Eighth Amendment should not apply to the States, you probably believe that the Second Amendment should not apply either, and that the states (and local governments) should be free to ban all firearms. Am I correct?

Sorry. don't buy it. I was a prosecutor for 26 years. NOBODY goes to jail [normally] until they've used up about 8 get outta jail free cards. Like: Juvenile PINS petition, juvenile probation, juvenile probation with psych and/ or alcohol conditions, unconditional discharge, conditional discharge. None of which involve incarceration. Then, after he turns 16 [in N.Y], he's a YO [youthful offender]. We go through all of the above again, plus ACODs and if he's convicted of a misdemeanor, a mandatory YO [sealed record], and if a felony, discretionary YO, which included a MAX of 4 years in prison if granted, with a sealed record. And then he becomes an adult.

As an example, had a kid [youthful offender, not a juvie], who assaulted an old guy [felony assault] working at a gas station [had given the kid's buddy a hard time]. Got the usual from the defense attorney. Low IQ, troubled home, yada, yada, yada. Had a Resisting Arrest prior. Sent him to prison. Had another YO [17 yr. old] charged with three burglaries. Judge wanted him to get a break- YO, 60 days/ 5 yrs. probation. Gave him the sentence, but made him eat one burg. as an adult. Result? When he showed charged with three more burgs [and a VOP] two weeks after he got out of jail, I sent him to prison, too. The adult plea made him a prior felony offender.

And as for leaving it to the individual states, it generally is [for state crimes]. But be careful what you wish for. First, I could look at a rap sheet with everything but the charge, disposition and sentence blacked out, and tell you whether or not it was handled in NYC [they gave away the store. And second, criminals don't always stay where they're sentenced. Remember Willie Horton's pass?

I never said the Bill of Rights shouldn’t apply to the States. When I said the SCOTUS usurps power that should belong to the states, I meant the SCOTUS redefines “cruel and unusual” to mean pretty much whatever it wants. That was clearly not the intent of the founders.

When it comes to subjective standards like “cruel and unusual” one should defer to the states. Could a state create a truly cruel and unusual punishment? Perhaps, but I can’t recall any doing so.

Take the recent case where the SCOTUS said the death penalty can’t be used in extreme cases of child rape (so long as the perp didn’t intend to kill the child of course). To me, that’s a cruel and unusual punishment on the law abiding citizens of this country!

So I am guessing by your view of children and humanity and general that you are not a follower of Christ's teachings.

We are talking about public policy on real world. Liberals conveniently hijack Jesus to advance their agenda. It is up to hardened felons to redeem themselves. Not the busybody who use felons to achieve redemption so much superior to others'. That is what those liberal lawyers and judges are doing.

If you want to risk your life to save their soul, that is fine. Don't drag others into it. You should not force them to swallow your vision of redemption. This is how liberalism destroys the world.

What is the point, you ask. It’s not about the criminal or rehabilitation. They can be rehabilitated if they want to and live in prison, all nice and rehabilitated. They can join the prison library and get their GED. They can go to bible study. They can train dogs or sew in prison. I don’t care, as long as they’re not on the street. Most juveniles tried and sentenced as adults are sent to a youth facility until they’re 23 or 25, then they ship them to the big house.

It’s about protecting the public from the feral beasts.

I don’t give a damn how far their brains are developed. If a 14 yr. old robs and murders someone or a 13 yr. old rapes a little child, I’d hate to see what they’d do with a fully developed brain!

If they’d throw away the key on these scumbags, we wouldn’t have to worry about them destroying people lives OR breeding more like themselves. Early imprisonment for life for young feral felons is a good way to cleanse the gene pool.

So I am guessing by your view of children and humanity and general that you are not a follower of Christ's teachings.

Only someone who is not a follower of Christ's teachings would presume to make such a slanderous judgement against someone because they do not accept the government presumption to teach morality. Liberals, in fact, love to use this kind of faux-rightiousness against those who dare to reject socialism, never realizing that the only points they're making exist in their own Christian-hating minds.

Troll Hint: Your incompetent socialist agenda is showing.

If you read TLRs statement he clearly says taht there it is a waste of time to try and redeem these human beings.

S/he didnt specify about any particular policy. His view was flat out non-Christian.

I didn’t condemn TLR, I just pointed out that viewing humans as non-reedemable is not a Christian point of view. If s/he does consider him/herself Christian than who cares, right?

I just pointed out that viewing humans as non-reedemable is not a Christian point of view.

No, that is a liberal interpretation of what they believe a Christian point of view is, or "should" be. Real Christians believe that only Christ "redeems" anyone, not them, and so they do not presume to be in the redeeming business themselves (unlike liberals).

In addition, Christians also believe it is possible to make oneself irredeemable, through the rejection of Christ and Christ's teachings. Liberals, on the other hand, think that discrimination of any kind - except the acceptance of liberalism and the rejection of anything else - is proof of hypocrisy and evil. So they believe that if a Christian discriminates between good and evil (rather than liberal approval and disapproval), they can be accused of violating Christ's command to love one another.

That this is not what Christianity actually teaches doesn't matter to a liberal, because liberals think like lying children - and their Leftist masters hide behind the liberals they control. But none them actually have anything to do with real Christianity, except to try to use it's misrepresentation as a weapon against Christians, whom they loathe for being able to see through their socialist lies.

I don’t want to pay the high cost of their rehab, then roll the dice and let them out with the HOPE they won’t destroy some more lives.

They can rehab themselves and the do-gooders can volunteer if they want to give them counseling, bible study, etc.. I’m tired of paying the freight for the cost of these rehab programs. I’ve seen the results and it’s 95% BS. The best rehab is a chain gang and teaching them to read, write and do basic arithmetic. Those are the fundamentals they need to rehab themselves on their own or with the help of volunteers and clergy. No TV, no cRAP music, no weight room, none of that. Wear their butts out and give them the basics. It’s up to them to sink or swim. If they rehab themselves they’ll STAY rehabbed instead of scamming the parole boards and judges. Then maybe they can be let out when they’re about 50 or so.

This country has gone way too soft on these beasts.

Travis Underhill, sentenced in Broward County to life on an armed robbery, collapsed while playing basketball at a Palm Beach County prison on Oct. 8 and died.

I am all for tough sentences, but this guy was charged with armed robbery and got life but people who kills others end up with 25 years? Maybe we should just look at the sentences. I am for giving a person who dies life in prison first and then give the guy who is charged with Armed Robbery life. I get sick when I see people who kill get small sentences.

FRiend, take off your blinders and actually READ what I wrote.

I did not write that seeing humans and unredeemable by other humans. You even copied what I wrote - very simple words in fact - and then misinterpreted them. In theory you should apologize, but in reality I know not to expect something like that from a person like you. The odds of you ever admitting you are wrong are quite low. Feel free to prove me wrong though.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.