Bill Text: NJ S3077 | 2016-2017 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Provides for review of and parole eligibility for certain juvenile sentences.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2017-03-13 - Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee [S3077 Detail]
Download: New_Jersey-2016-S3077-Introduced.html
Sponsored by:
Senator LINDA R. GREENSTEIN
District 14 (Mercer and Middlesex)
SYNOPSIS
Provides for review of and parole eligibility for certain juvenile sentences.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
As introduced.
An Act concerning review of and parole eligibility for certain juvenile sentences and supplementing Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes and Title 30 of the Revised Statutes.
Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:
1. The Legislature finds and declares:
a. In a series of seminal cases decided since 2005, the United States Supreme Court has increasingly recognized, for sentencing purposes, how juveniles are different from adults and how those differences, such as age, immaturity, and potential for rehabilitation, render lifetime imprisonment cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
b. In Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), the United States Supreme Court held that juveniles are less culpable than adults due to lack of maturity, susceptibility to negative influences and peer pressure, and premature character development, and therefore, the imposition of the death penalty on a juvenile offender under 18 years of age is unconstitutional.
c. In Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), the United States Supreme Court prohibited a sentence of life without the possibility of parole for a juvenile offender who committed a nonhomicide offense on the grounds that 1) there was no adequate penal justification for the sentence, and 2) under the sentence a juvenile offender was improperly denied a chance to demonstrate growth, maturity, and rehabilitation. The court further noted that its holding did not guarantee a juvenile's eventual release from incarceration, but rather a meaningful opportunity for release.
d. In Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), the United States Supreme Court held that mandatory life without parole for juveniles convicted of any offense is unconstitutional and that there must be an opportunity for the judge or jury to consider mitigating factors associated with youth before imposing the most severe punishment.
e. The United States Supreme Court held in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) that the holding in Miller v. Alabama banning life imprisonment without parole was retroactive.
f. Based on these United States Supreme Court rulings, the New Jersey Supreme Court recently held in State v. Zuber, ___ N.J. ___ (2017) that judges in this State are required to evaluate the mitigating factors relating to youth enumerated in Miller v. Alabama when a juvenile offender faces an aggregate sentence of imprisonment that amounts to the practical equivalent of life without parole.
g. Recognizing in State v. Zuber that consideration of the Miller factors still may result in lengthy sentences for juveniles, to avoid future constitutional infirmities the court further requested "the Legislature to consider enacting a scheme that provides for later review of juvenile sentences with lengthy periods of parole ineligibility, and to consider whether defendants should be entitled to appointed counsel at that hearing."
h. In response to State v. Zuber, the Legislature finds and declares that juveniles in this State who are tried as adults and receive lengthy sentences should be accorded the right to have their sentences reviewed and be represented by counsel at the review hearing. These juveniles also should be eligible for parole after serving a lengthy prison sentence.
2. For the purposes of this act, "juvenile offender" means a juvenile tried as an adult and sentenced to imprisonment for an offense committed when the person was under the age of 18.
3. In sentencing a juvenile offender, in addition to any other factors the court is required to consider, the court also shall consider the following mitigating factors:
a. the juvenile offender's chronological age, including the extent of immaturity and impetuosity of the offender, and ability of the offender to appreciate risks and consequences;
b. the family and home environment surrounding the juvenile offender, and whether the offender has been subject to brutality or family dysfunction;
c. the circumstances of the offense, including the extent of the juvenile offender's participation in the conduct and the way familial and peer pressures may have affected the offender;
d. whether the juvenile offender may have been charged and convicted of a lesser offense if not for incompetencies associated with youth, such as an inability to deal with police officers or prosecutors, including on a plea agreement, or incapacity to assist the attorneys representing the offender; and
e. the possibility of rehabilitation.
4. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law to the contrary, a juvenile offender sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 30 years or more without eligibility for parole may petition the Superior Court for review of that sentence.
a. A juvenile offender who is eligible for a review of a sentence pursuant to this section shall be represented by the Office of the Public Defender, unless the offender chooses to be represented by pro bono or nonprofit counsel or has engaged private counsel at the offender's expense.
b. The court shall consider the mitigating factors set forth in section 3 of P.L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill) when determining whether a juvenile's sentence should be modified.
c. Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, the court may modify the juvenile offender's sentence, including any minimum or mandatory sentence, but nothing in this act shall be deemed to require the court to modify a juvenile offender's sentence. If the court denies a modification, it shall place on the record the reasons supporting the denial.
d. A juvenile offender whose sentence has been reviewed by the court pursuant to this section shall not be entitled to subsequent review.
5. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a juvenile offender who has served a term of imprisonment of 30 or more years for murder, pursuant to N.J.S.2C:11-3, or a term of imprisonment of 20 or more years for any other offense, shall be eligible for a parole hearing pursuant to the provisions of the "Parole Act of 1979," P.L.1979, c.441 (C.30:4-123.45 et seq.).
a. At the parole eligibility hearing, the State Parole Board shall consider the mitigating factors set forth in section 3 of P.L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill).
b. The juvenile offender seeking parole pursuant to this section shall be represented by the Office of the Public Defender, unless the offender chooses to be represented by pro bono or nonprofit counsel or has engaged private counsel at the offender's expense.
c. The juvenile offender shall be afforded the opportunity to testify and call witnesses, including expert witnesses, at the hearing.
d. All testimony at the hearing shall be recorded or transcribed.
e. A determination by the State Parole Board pursuant to this section shall include a written record explaining the board's decision and its reasoning and giving specific consideration to the mitigating factors the board is required to consider pursuant to subsection a. of this section.
f. The future eligibility date of a juvenile offender who is denied parole pursuant to this section shall not exceed 48 months.
6. This act shall take effect immediately and shall retroactively apply to juvenile offenders sentenced prior to the effective date of the act.
STATEMENT
In response to the recent decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court in State v. Zuber, ___ N.J. ___ (2017), this bill recognizes that criminal offenders who, as juveniles, were tried as adults and were sentenced to terms of imprisonment that amount to life imprisonment without parole should have the opportunity to have their sentences reviewed and to be eligible for parole.
The bill requires the court to consider certain mitigating factors when sentencing a juvenile offender. These factors were established by the United States Supreme Court in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 567 U.S. 460 (2012), which held that mandatory life sentences for juveniles are unconstitutional. The Miller factors include:
(1) the juvenile offender's chronological age, including the extent of immaturity and impetuosity of the offender, and ability of the offender to appreciate risks and consequences;
(2) the family and home environment surrounding the juvenile offender, and whether the offender has been subject to brutality or family dysfunction;
(3) the circumstances of the offense, including the extent of the juvenile offender's participation in the conduct and the way familial and peer pressures may have affected the offender;
(4) whether the juvenile offender may have been charged and convicted of a lesser offense if not for incompetencies associated with youth, such as an inability to deal with police officers or prosecutors, including on a plea agreement, or incapacity to assist the attorneys representing the offender; and
(5) the possibility of rehabilitation.
The bill defines a "juvenile offender" as a juvenile tried as an adult and sentenced to imprisonment for an offense committed when the person was under the age of 18.
Under the bill, juvenile offenders who have received a sentence of imprisonment of 30 years or more without eligibility for parole may petition the Superior Court to review the sentence. The juvenile offender is to be represented by the Office of the Public Defender, unless he or she hires private counsel or is represented by pro bono or nonprofit counsel. The court is required to consider the Miller factors at the hearing to determine if the juvenile offender's sentence should be modified. The court may modify the juvenile offender's sentence, including any minimum or mandatory sentence, but it not required to do so by the bill. Reasons for denying modification are to be stated on the record. A juvenile offender may have his or her sentence reviewed only once.
Finally, the bill makes juvenile offenders eligible for a parole hearing if they have served at least 30 or more years in prison for murder or 20 or more years for any other offense. The Parole Board is required to consider the Miller factors at the hearing. The juvenile has the right to be represented by the Public Defender if he or she isn't otherwise represented. The juvenile offender has the right to testify and call witnesses, including expert witnesses, at the hearing. The testimony is to be recorded or transcribed. The Parole Board's determination is to include a written record explaining the board's decision and its reasoning, and giving specific consideration to the Miller factors. The future eligibility date of a juvenile offender who is denied parole is not to exceed 48 months.
The bill's provisions apply retroactively and apply to juveniles sentenced before its effective date.
This bill recognizes the difference between juveniles and adults for criminal sentencing purposes and that these differences counsel against irrevocably sentencing juveniles to life in prison. It cannot be determined at an early age that a juvenile cannot be rehabilitated and, therefore, juveniles are to be provided a meaningful opportunity to obtain release.
