Excessive Minimum Sentences Sentences for Adolescents Are Cruel, Unusual
LANSING: Michigan Criminal Justice and Public Safety organizations today thanked the Supreme Court for hearing People v. Eads, (MSC Docket No. 168205). In 1992, Mr. James Eads was convicted of second-degree murder and felony-firearm for crimes he committed when he was 16 years old and was sentenced to 50-75 years in prison.
“Any parent knows that kids can sometimes do dumb things, harmful things, but these do not necessarily reflect on the adult they will grow into. When the courts send an adolescent to prison for 50 years or more, they are condemning that child to die in prison,” said Chuck Warpehoski with the Michigan Collaborative to End Mass Incarceration. “By continuing to punish people for the crimes of their childhood, even after they’ve taken accountability and rehabilitated, extreme sentences disregards the potential all people have for change and redemption.”
“There may be a technical difference between a life sentence and a term of years, but when that term of years is extremely long, there is no effective difference. Mandatory life sentences are unconstitutional for youth, not only because they are cruel and unusual, but because they treat children as if they have the mental and emotional maturity of adults. For the same reason, a virtual life sentence – like the 50- to 75-year sentence given to Mr. Eads in his youth – should also be considered unconstitutional,” said Cassie Larrieux of Safe & Just Michigan.
“Calling it a term-of-years sentence does not change its reality. When a child is given a sentence so long it extinguishes any meaningful chance at life beyond prison, it becomes exactly what the Constitution forbids,” said Jose Burgos, Policy Advocate, Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth.
###
The post Michigan Organizations Call On Supreme Court to End Extreme Sentences for Youth first appeared on Michigan Collaborative to End Mass Incarceration.