Chris Geidner/BuzzFeed
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled that juveniles previously sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for homicide offenses are covered by a 2012 decision that banned the practice going forward.
The 6-3 decision in Henry Montgomery's case could affect any person who was automatically sentenced to life without parole for a homicide.
The decision does not require that states re-sentence all of those who were sentenced to life without parole automatically, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court. "[P]ermitting juvenile homicide offenders to be considered for parole" is sufficient, he noted.
In 2012, the Supreme Court held that states could not have a mandatory sentence of life without parole for juvenile homicide offenders. The question in Monday's case was whether that ruling applied to past offenders like Montgomery, who was convicted of killing a deputy sheriff in 1963 at the age of 17.
When the court held arguments in the case this past fall, several justices had questioned attorneys on whether the court even had jurisdiction to hear the case. In Monday's decision, the court's majority decided that, yes, it did have jurisdiction to hear the case.
In its ruling, Kennedy wrote for the court that the 2012 decision, Miller v. Alabama, "announced a substantive rule of constitutional law" that is retroactive to past sentences like Montgomery's one under the court's rules for deciding whether criminal law decisions apply retroactively. Generally speaking, if a criminal law ruling is substantive, it applies retroactively; if procedural, it does not.
Because "children are constitutionally different," Kennedy wrote, "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 of life outside prison walls must be restored."
Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito dissented.
Source BuzzFeed - Politics http://ift.tt/1njAwNK
0 comments:
Post a Comment