Technically Not Life: How De Facto Life Sentences Condemn Juveniles to Die in Prison

Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi reignited interest in the constitutionality of lengthy prison sentences for juveniles. A substantial proportion of juveniles convicted of homicide and nonhomicide are currently serving “virtual life” or “de facto life” sentences. De facto life sentences are lengthy sentences that may be considered the equivalent of a life sentence. This article investigates how states’ statutory schemes and appellate court decisions have allowed for the use of de facto life sentences for juveniles convicted of homicide as well as nonhomicide offenses. By employing content analytical techniques, this article identifies the variation in how de facto life sentences are defined and applied across the states. Nearly every state imposes some type of de facto life sentence on juveniles, suggesting that the time is ripe for courts to determine whether these “virtual life” terms adhere to the Court's Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Keywords

juvenile prison sentences “virtual” life sentences

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alaska Stat. Ann. § 12.55.125, 2023.

Amalfi Marques

Kokkalera

S. S.

Vaughn

M. S.

(2023). Aging in prison: Understanding elderly incarcerated populations. In Ahlin

E. M.

Mitchell

, & Atkin-Plunk

C. A.

(Eds.), Handbook on inequalities in sentencing and corrections among marginalized populations (pp. 240–254). Routledge.

Antes

K. E.

(2013). Taking a life without taking a life: State v. Ninham violates the eighth amendment by sentencing a fourteen-year-old juvenile to life in prison without parole. New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement, 39(1), 215–242.

Applegate

B. K.

Bolin

R. M.

Ouellette

H. M.

(2022). Extending the long arm of the law: Punishment and rehabilitation as motives of public support for handling violent juvenile offenders as adults. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1-19. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-022-09518-w

Applegate

B. K.

Davis

R. K.

(2006). Public views on sentencing juvenile murderers: The impact of offender, offense, and perceived maturity. Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice, 4(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204005282312

Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-102, 2017.

Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-103, 2021.

Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-401, 2023.

Birnbaum

Murillo

Daftary-Kapur

(2023). Public perceptions of juvenile life without parole and alternative sentences: A Michigan based sample. Crime & Delinquency. Advance Online Publication. https://doi-org.ezproxy.shsu.edu/10.1177/00111287231174412

10.

Budder v. Addison, 851 F.3d 1047 (10th Cir. 2017), cert. denied, Byrd v. Budder, 583 U.S. 1007 (2017).

11.

Caldwell

(2016). Creating meaningful opportunities for release: Graham, Miller and California’s youth offender parole hearings. N.Y.U. Review of Law & Social Change, 40(2), 245–304.

12.

Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth. (2023). No child should spend life in prison. The Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth. https://cfsy.org/

13.

Candler

R. M.

(2022). Jones v. Mississippi: The supreme court’s opportunity to clarify the confusion left in the wake of Miller. Widener Law Review, 28(1), 97–118.

14.

Cauffman

Steinberg

(2000). (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18(6), 741–760. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.416

15.

Charmaz

(2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

16.

Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 17-22.5-104, 2021.

17.

Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18-3-102, 2021.

18.

Commonwealth v. Felder, 269 A.3d 1232 (Pa. Sup. Ct. 2022), reargument denied (Apr. 12, 2022).

19.

D.C. Code Ann. § 22-2104, 2013.

20.

Detwiler v. State, 449 P.3d 873 (Okla. Ct. Cr. App. 2019).

21.

Drinan

C. H.

(2021). Jones v. Mississippi and the court’s quiet burial of the Miller trilogy. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 19(1), 181–199.

22.

Faulk

(April 28, 2021). Evan Miller, youngest person ever sentenced to life without parole in Alabama, must remain in prison. AL.Com. https://www.al.com/news/2021/04/evan-miller-youngest-child-ever-sentenced-to-life-without-parole-in-alabama-must-remain-in-prison.html

23.

FBI Uniform Crime Reporting. (2019). 2019 crime in the United States: Violent crime. U.S. Department of Justice. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/violent-crime

24.

Feld

B. C.

(2013). The youth discount: Old enough to do the crime, too young to do the time. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 11(1), 107–148.

25.

Feld

B. C.

(2018). Punishing kids in juvenile and criminal courts. Crime & Justice, 47(1), 417–474. https://doi-org.ezproxy.shsu.edu/10.1086/695399 https://doi.org/10.1086/695399

26.

Fernandez

(2021). Juveniles are different: Easier said than done resolving disparities among courts regarding the constitutionality of sentencing juveniles to de facto life-without-parole. Florida International University Law Review, 14(4), 775–801. https://doi.org/10.25148/lawrev.14.4.13

27.

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 775.082, 2019.

28.

Franco-Paredes

Ghandnoosh

Latif

Krsak

Henao-Martinez

A. F.

Robins

Barahona

L. V.

Poeschla

E. M.

(2021). Decarceration and community re-entry in the COVID-19 era. Lancet Infectious Diseases, 21, e10–e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30730-1

29.

Friedman

R. A.

(2022). Roper, Graham, Miller & the MS-13 juvenile homicide cases. New York University Annual Survey of American Law, 77(1), 97–143.

30.

Garbarino

(2018). Miller’s children: Why giving teenage killers a second chance matters for all of US. University of California Press.

31.

Garrity

(2020). Cruel and unusual: Closing the door on juvenile de facto life sentences. Catholic University Law Review, 69(3), 613–632.

32.

Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

33.

Grant v. United States, WL 5843847 (D. N.J. 2014), appeal after new sentencing hearing, United States v. Grant, 887 F.3d 131 (3^rd Cir. 2018a), reh’g en banc granted, vacated, United States v. Grant, 905 F.3d 285 (3^rd Cir. 2018b), on reh’g en banc, United States v. Grant, 9 F.4^th 186 (3^rd Cir. 2021).

34.

Henry

J. S.

Salvatore

Pugh

B.-E.

(2018). Virtual life sentences: An exploratory study. The Prison Journal, 98(3), 294–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885518764915

35.

Hofer

(2020). De facto life sentencing: What is a de facto life sentence and how Illinois should define this in their sentencing laws. University of Illinois Chicago Law Review, 53(1), 39–72.

36.

Hogue

(2021). The end of an error: How Ohio abolished JLWOP through senate bill 256 and how the legislation compares to other jurisdictions. University of Toledo Law Review, 53(1), 103–126.

37.

Horton

A. M.

Reynolds

C. R.

(2021). Trajectory of the development of executive functioning: Implications for death as a penalty as applied to the late adolescent class. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 7(1-2), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40817-021-00103-z

38.

Hutcheson

(2020). How long is a juvenile’s “life” sentence? Defining such for convicted juveniles in Missouri. UMKC Law Review, 88(3), 711–735.

39.

Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 730 5/5-4.5-105, 2017.

40.

Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-3, 2015.

41.

Janes

K. M.

(2022). Life or death: Employing state constitutional principles of proportionality to combat the extreme sentencing of emerging adults. Virginia Law Review, 108(8), 1897–1946.

42.

Johnson

Roceleau

A. M.

Martin

A. B.

(2016). Hard time: A fresh look at understanding and reforming the prison (4th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.

43.

Johnson

T. W.

(2023). Prohibiting young adult life without parole: Examining diminished capacity and diminished culpability. The Harbinger, 47, 83–89.

44.

Jones v. Mississippi, 141 S.Ct. 1307 (2021).

45.

Jordan

(2018). Waiver to criminal court (also transfer or certification). In Schreck

C. J.

(Ed.), The encyclopedia of juvenile delinquency and justice (pp. 907–910). Wiley & Sons Inc.

46.

Kerner v. State, 178 N.E.3d 1215 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021), transfer denied, 180 N.E.3d 939 (Ind. Sup. Ct. 2022).

47.

Kokkalera

S. S.

Singer

S. I.

(2023). Now with the possibility of parole: Enabling a juvenile lifer’s meaningful review. British Journal of Criminology, 63(1), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azac001

48.

Kokkalera

S. S.

Strah

B. M.

Bornstein

(2021). Too young for the crime, yet old enough to do life: A critical review of how state felony murder laws apply to juvenile defendants. Journal of Criminal Justice and Law, 4(2), 90–107. https://jcjl.pubpub.org/pub/v4i290107

49.

Kubiak

S. P.

Allen

(2011). Public opinion regarding juvenile life without parole in consecutive statewide surveys. Crime & Delinquency, 57(4), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128708317987

50.

Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 510.040, 2023.

51.

Lambie

Randell

(2013). The impact of incarceration on juvenile offenders. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(3), 448–459. https://doi-org.ezproxy.shsu.edu/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.01.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.01.007

52.

Lewis v. State, 428 S.W.3d 860 (Tex. Ct. Crim. App. 2014), cert. denied, Nolley v. Texas, 574 U.S. 901 (2014).

53.

Linder

Martinez

(2020). No path to redemption: Evaluating Texas’s practice of sentencing kids to de facto life without parole in adult prison. Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice, 22(3), 307–344.

54.

Luna

(2011). The relevance of immaturities in the juvenile brain to culpability and rehabilitation. Hastings Law Journal, 63(6), 1469–1486.

55.

Malvo v. Mathena, 893 F.3d 265 (4th Cir. 2018), abrogated by, Jones v. Mississippi, 141 S.Ct. 1307 (2021).

56.

Matusiak

M. C.

Vaughn

M. S.

del Carmen

R. V.

(2014). The progression of evolving standards of decency in U.S. Supreme court decisions. Criminal Justice Review, 39(3), 253–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016814531779

57.

McKinley v. Butler, 809 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2016), sentence modified, People v. McKinley 176 N.E.3d 166 (Ill. App. Ct. 1 Dist. 2020).

58.

Meadows

(2018). Realizing “meaningful” in Maryland: A call for reforming Maryland’s parole system in light of Graham, Miller, and Montgomery. University of Baltimore Law Forum, 48(2), 59–68.

59.

Meggitt

(2021). Trends in laws governing the behavior of late adolescents up to age 21 since Roper. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 7 (1-2), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40817-021-00102-0

60.

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012).

61.

Mistrett

Espinoza

(2021). Youth in adult courts, jails, and prisons. The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/app/uploads/2022/09/Youth-in-Adult-Courts-Jails-and-Prisons.pdf

62.

Mitchell

(2023). Analyzing the law qualitatively. Qualitative Research Journal, 23(1), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-04-2022-0061

63.

Mo. Ann. Stat. § 558.011, 2021.

64.

Mo. Ann. Stat. § 565.033, 2016.

65.

Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718 (2016).

66.

Moore v. Biter, 725 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2013), reh'g and reh'g en banc denied, 742 F.3d 917 (9th Cir. 2014), appeal after remand from federal court, People v. Moore, WL 8212832 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015), review granted (March 9, 2016), cause transferred, (August 17, 2016), opinion after transfer, People v. Moore, WL 347460 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017), review denied (May 10, 2017).

67.

National Center for Juvenile Justice [NCJJ]. (2022). Juvenile justice geography, policy, practice & statistics . http://www.jjgps.org/jurisdictional-boundaries#compare-transfer-provisions?age=-1&action=2&year=2016&state=52&offense=-1

68.

Neb. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 28-105.02, 2013.

69.

Nellis

(2017). Still life: America’s increasing use of life and long-term sentences. The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/reports/still-life-americaos-increasing-use-of-life-and-long-term-sentences/

70.

Nellis

(2019). Youth sentenced to life imprisonment . The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/fact-sheet/youth-sentenced-to-life-imprisonment/

71.

Nellis

(2021). No end in sight: America’s enduring reliance on life sentences. The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/reports/no-end-in-sight-americas-enduring-reliance-on-life-sentences/

72.

Nolasco

C. A. R. I.

Vaughn

M. S.

del Carmen

R. V.

(2010). Toward a new methodology for legal research in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511250903518944

73.

Ohio S. B. 256, 133^rd General Assembly, 2019. https://legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/133/sb256

74.

Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 21, § 798, 1999.

75.

Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 21, § 800, 1999.

76.

Patterson

E. J.

(2013). The dose-response of time served in prison on mortality: New York state, 1989-2003. American Journal of Public Health, 103(3), 523–528. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301148

77.

People v. Applewhite, 144 N.E.3d 1190 (Table) (Ill. Sup. Ct. 2020), on remand, 171 N.E.3d 891 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).

78.

People v. Buffer, WL 6951472 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012), appeal denied, 982 N.E.2d 770 (Ill Sup. Ct. 2013), post-conviction relief granted, 75 N.E.3d 470 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017), appeal allowed, 93 N.E.3d 1076 (Ill. Sup. Ct. 2017), aff’d on other grounds, People v. Buffer, 137 N.E.3d 763 (Ill. Sup. Ct. 2019).

79.

People v. McKinley, 875 N.E.2d 1119 (Ill. Sup. Ct. 2007) (Table), appeal denied, People v. McKinley, 1 N.E.3d 120 (Ill. Ct. App. 2010) (Table), dismissal of post-conviction relief aff'd, People v. McKinley, 943 N.E.2d 1105 (Ill. Sup. Ct. 2011) (Table), habeas corpus petition denied, McKinley v. Harrington, WL1292789 (N.D. Ill. 2014), vacated and remanded, McKinley v. Butler, 809 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2016), on remand sentence modified, People v. McKinley, 176 N.E.3d 166 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).

80.

Perlin

M. L.

Lynch

A. J.

(2021). Some mother’s child has gone astray”: Neuroscientific approaches to a therapeutic jurisprudence model of juvenile sentencing. Family Court Review, 59(3), 478–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12589

81.

Phillips

L. A.

(2018). United States v. Grant: Does a term-of-years sentence that meets a juvenile's expected life span violate the eighth amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment? American Journal of Trial Advocacy, 42(1), 185–207.

82.

Proctor v. Kelley, 562 S.W.3d 837 (Ark. Sup. Ct. 2018), cert. denied, 140 S.Ct. 481(2019).

83.

Proctor v. Payne, WL 1414025 (E.D. Ark. 2021a), report and recommendation adopted, Proctor v. Payne, WL 1414081 (E.D. Ark. 2021b), remanded, Proctor v. Payne, WL 274515 (8^th Cir. 2022).

84.

Puzzanchera

Hockenberry

Sickmund

(2022). Youth and the juvenile justice system: 2022 national report . National Center for Juvenile Justice. https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/publications/2022-national-report.pdf

85.

Restore Justice & Restore Justice Illinois. (2020). Know more: De facto life sentences. Restore Justice . https://www.restorejustice.org/about-us/resources/know-more/know-more-de-facto-life-sentences/

86.

Ripper

Johnson

(2019). Livable term sentences as alternatives to juvenile life without parole: A sentencing framework based on United States v. Grant. Journal of Criminal Justice and Law, 3(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-04-2022-0061

87.

Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).

88.

Rovner

(2021). Juvenile life without parole: An overview . The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/policy-brief/juvenile-life-without-parole-an-overview/

89.

Ryberb

(2014). Punishing adolescents—on maturity and diminished responsibility. Neuroethics, 7(3), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-014-9203-6

90.

Sentencing Project (2019). Campaign to end life imprisonment: Virtual life sentences. The Sentencing Project.

91.

Shah

(2021). De facto life sentences trigger juvenile-specific eighth amendment protections: Why Bowling was wrongly decided. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal, 30(2), 215–250.

92.

Shalouei v. State, 524 S.W.3d 766 (Tex. App. Ct. 14^th Dist. 2017), petition for discretionary review refused, (June 28, 2017), habeas corpus denied, Shalouei v. Davis, WL 109624 (S.D. Tex. 2020).

93.

Singer

S. I.

(1996). Recriminalizing delinquency: Violent juvenile crime and juvenile justice reform. Cambridge University Press.

94.

Spohn

Hemmens

McCann

(2019). Courts: A text/reader (3rd ed.).

ProtoView

95.

State v. Davilla, 462 P.3d 748 (Or. App. Ct. 2020), review denied, 479 P.3d 276 (Or. Sup. Ct. 2021).

96.

State v. Kelliher, 849 S.E.2d 333 (N.C. App. Ct. 2020), temporary stay allowed, 848 S.E.2d 493 (N.C. Sup. Ct. 2020), review allowed, writ allowed, appeal dismissed, 854 S.E.2d 584 (N.C. Sup. Ct. 2021), review allowed, 854 S.E.2d 586 (N.C. Sup. Ct. 2021), aff’d as modified, State v. Kelliher, 873 S.E.2d 366 (N.C. Sup. Ct. 2022).

97.

State v. Null, 836 N.W.2d 41 (Iowa Sup. Ct. 2013), appeal after new sentencing hearing, State v. Null, 886 N.W.2d 106 (Iowa App. Ct. 2016), appeal after new sentencing hearing, State v. Null, 912 N.W.2d 855 (Iowa App. Ct. 2018).

98.

State v. Steele, 915 N.W.2d 560 (Neb. Sup. Ct. 2018).

99.

Steier

(2022, January 4). How long is a life sentence? State-by-state overview. Recording Law. https://recordinglaw.com/how-long-is-a-life-sentence/

100.

Steinberg

(2012). Should the science of adolescent brain development inform public policy? Issues in Science and Technology, 28(3), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.64.8.739

101.

Steinberg

(2013). The influence of neuroscience on U.S. Supreme Court decisions about adolescents’ criminal culpability. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(7), 513–518. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3509

102.

Steinberg

(2017). Adolescent brain science and juvenile justice policymaking. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(4), 410–420. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000128

103.

Steinberg

Scott

E. S.

(2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. American Psychologist, 58(12), 1009–1018. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.12.1009

104.

Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 54.04, 2021.

105.

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.32, 2009.

106.

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 19.02, 1994.

107.

Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02, 2021.

108.

Tikhomirov

(2019). A meaningful opportunity for release: Graham and Miller applied to de facto sentences of life without parole for juvenile offenders. Boston College Law Review, 60, II–332-II-349.

109.

United States Sentencing Commission. (July, 2022). Life sentences in the federal system . https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/life-sentences-federal-system

110.

United States Sentencing Commission. (2015). Life sentences in the federal system . https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-publications/life-sentences-federal-criminal-justice-system

111.

United States v. Jefferson, 816 F.3d 1016 (8th Cir. 2016), reh’g. and reh’g. en banc denied (May 24, 2016), cert. denied, Jefferson v. United States, 582 U.S. 983 (2017).

112.

Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-203, 2003.

113.

Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-103, 2022.

114.

Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-302, 2023.

115.

Villaume

(2005). “Life without parole” and “virtual life sentences”: Death sentences by any other name. Contemporary Justice Review, 8(3), 265–277. https://doi-org.ezproxy.shsu.edu/10.1080/10282580500132997 https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580500132997

116.

Vt. Stat. Ann. Tit. 13, § 2303, 2005.

117.

Waldman

(2023). Supermajority: How the Supreme Court divided America. Simon & Schuster.

118.

Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.20.021, 2015.

119.

Welner

DeLisi

Knous-Westfall

H. M.

Salsberg

Janusewski

(2023). Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States. Forensic Science International: Mind and Law, 4, 100112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsiml.2022.100112

120.

Zimring

F. E.

(2010). The power politics of juvenile court transfer: Mildly revisionist history of the 1990s. Louisiana Law Review, 71(1), 1–16.