Pennsylvania Supreme Court Decision Will Leave Juvenile Lifers in Prison
Last year, the United States Supreme Court ruled that sentencing juvenile offenders to life in prison was cruel and unusual punishment, sparking a glimmer of hope in some 450 inmates across Pennsylvania. But in a recent turn of events, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has dashed that hope by ruling not to apply the decision retroactively. Now, disappointed lifers are struggling harder than ever for the possibility of parole.
Out of Appeals and Out of Luck
In 2012, the case of Miller v. Alabama led to a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole for juveniles constituted cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The landmark ruling came as good news for an approximate 450 lifers across the state of Pennsylvania, many incarcerated for crimes committed years or even decades ago. But now, that quick flash of excitement is sizzling out, because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has counter-ruled that the decision of Miller v. Alabama cannot be applied retroactively to lifers who are already in the system — and out of appeals.
Depending on the timing of their crime, some offenders are finding themselves holding a worse hand of legal cards than others — which has many attorneys frustrated. Marsha Levick, a Philadelphia attorney for the Juvenile Law Center, is among them. “When the U.S. Supreme Court puts down a marker,” says Levick, “it is morally unconscionable to leave any juvenile on the other side of that marker.”
Because while some inmates who were “fortunate” enough to be sentenced recently may still be able to cling to the hope of their remaining appeals, those who exhausted those appeals before the Miller ruling remain trapped without parole — even though the crimes themselves may be highly similar. Bradley Bridge, an attorney with the Defender Association of Philadelphia, calls the ruling “exceedingly unfair,” and Robert Buttner, another attorney, poses the question, “Are we saying children’s immaturity and development is less now than it was in the 1980s and 1990s?”
Grieving Families Welcome the Decision
However, on the other side of the fence, victims of aging crimes are heartened by the Pennsylvania Court’s decision. In 2003 in Allentown, PA, Darryl Romig’s 12-year-old daughter was raped and then strangled to death by Brian A. Bahr. Bahr was incarcerated at 17. Ten years later, now 27 years old, Bahr is one of the roughly 450 inmates affected by the new rulings. But while Bahr’s crimes may be past, Romig’s pains are still very much present.
“It’s really good to hear,” says Romig. “Really. I’m just glad he doesn’t have the chance to be resentenced. He did what he did and he deserved what he got.” Richard Long is the executive director of the PA District Attorney’s Association, and he tends to agree with Romig. “The survivors of murder victims have had to deal with the loss of a loved one taken from them by a juvenile murderer,” says Long. “Would it be fair to have those cases reopened for another sentencing?”
If your child is facing criminal allegations, contact the Pennsylvania criminal defense attorneys at Young, Marr & Associates immediately, or call us at (609) 755-3115 in New Jersey or (215) 701-6519 in Pennsylvania.
NO JAIL TIME
Commonwealth v. "H" (DUI case)
Client was charged with three separate DUI cases calling for mandatory minimum imprisonment of 90 days on each case. Client was advised to seek immediate intensive alcohol counseling. Client was sentenced to 1 year of house arrest after serving 3 days in the county prison.
Commonwealth v. "C" (Felony drug/Firearms case)
Client was charged with felony Delivery of drugs and illegal gun possession and was facing a mandatory 3-6 year prison sentence in the State prison system. Client was sentenced to one year of house arrest.
Commonwealth v. "S"
Client was charged with simple assault, domestic. After a hearing where evidence and testimony was presented, the entire case was dismissed by Judge Leonard Brown.
State of New Jersey v. "H"
Charges for young man charged with second degree aggravated assault were downgraded to third degree and he was accepted into the County Pretrial Intervention program with charges to be dismissed and record expunged after one year of misconduct free behavior.
OUR CRIMINAL DEFENSE TEAM INCLUDES TWO FORMER DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
We have decades of experience dealing with local police departments, prosecutors, and judges throughout southeastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
Anyone facing charges involving a criminal offense can expect to experience a heightened degree of emotional turmoil, for themselves, as well as their family members. Our team of highly qualified criminal law attorneys and expert legal support staff are committed to providing each of our client’s with the compassion and understanding they deserve, as well as an aggressive plan for representation at an affordable price.
As former prosecutors, we have a balanced and in-depth understanding of the criminal justice system and how the prosecution prepares cases. In addition, we have long-standing experience dealing with local police departments, prosecutors and judges throughout southeastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
At Young, Marr and Associates, when we say “experience matters,” we mean it. Our lawyers, which include two former prosecutors and a former senior deputy district attorney bring more than three decades of criminal law experience, handling more than 10,000 criminal cases. It is precisely that experience that allows us to achieve outstanding results for our clients facing DUI, traffic, felony and misdemeanor charges in state, federal and juvenile courts.