ARGUING PAROLE FOR MICHIGAN’S “JUVENILE LIFERS”

By DEBRA HAIGHT
ST. JOSEPH – The New York Times recently criticized Michigan prosecutors in an editorial about the fate of so-called “juvenile lifers”. The paper’s editorial board said Michigan prosecutors are ignoring 2012 and 2016 U.S. Supreme Court rulings that limit life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders to only the rarest of circumstances.

“Michigan prisons house 363 of these inmates,” the Sept. 11 editorial stated. “All but a very few should be resentenced to shorter terms, with the possibility of parole. Yet prosecutors are seeking to keep more than half of them locked up forever.”

The editorial was especially critical of Wayne County where the paper claimed that prosecutors wants to resentence at least 60 of the 150 “juvenile lifers” to life without parole as well as Oakland County where prosecutors are seeking life without parole resentences for 44 of 49 “juvenile lifers.”

Editorial writers noted that young people are biologically and psychologically different from adults and are more impulsive. They pointed out that society recognizes the differences between juveniles and adults when it comes to driving, voting and buying alcohol and the criminal justice system should too.

In Berrien County Prosecutor Michael Sepic’s view, it’s a misplaced criticism. It is not up to the prosecutor to resentence “juvenile lifers”, it’s the decision of judges and Michigan judges are still working through all the details of how that will work.

Sepic and his office have has 12 “juvenile lifer” cases to deal with since 2012 and only one of them, the case against Dakotah Eliason, has been resolved. Eliason was 14 when he shot and killed his step-grandfather near Buchanan in 2010 and was resentenced in 2015 to a term of 35 to 60 years rather than life in prison without parole.

One other case, that of Dequarius Stewart, is currently in the appeals process over the question whether a judge or a jury should resentence him. Stewart was 17 when he robbed and killed a man outside a Benton Harbor convenience store, also in 2010.

Sepic said each of the 12 “juvenile lifer” cases in Berrien County involved youth who actually did the killings. They were not “aiders or abetters” or get away drivers as has been the case with other “juvenile lifer” cases around the country.

Sepic called the 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Miller vs. Alabama “a new frontier.” “The Miller decision is new to prosecutors and to the criminal justice system,” he said. “This is a new frontier, a lot of the words (in the Miller ruling) have not been litigated.”

He puts words like “rare” and “irreparable corruption” in the category of words that need to be litigated as to their meaning. “We need judges to make the decision as to what is rare,” he said.

He added that the Supreme Court has told judges to consider factors such as juveniles’ school records, mental health records and work history which aren’t necessarily readily available. “These are sources of information we either didn’t have at the time or didn’t capture, he said. “I’ve filed motions in these cases in part because we want information.”

The county’s oldest “juvenile lifer” case is one example where there’s less opportunity for information and records being available. That case goes back to 1967 when then 16 year old Bobby Gene Griffin broke into a home where he sexually assaulted and beat an 84 year old woman to death.

Sepic said he has assigned each of the 11 remaining “juvenile lifer” cases to one of his prosecutors. He noted that there’s a lot to consider when it comes to making a resentencing recommendation including the facts of each case and the social and family background of each defendant.

“At one end, you might have a kid with parents who were in and out of prison, who didn’t go to school half the time and didn’t have the ability to develop a level of maturity,” he said. “At the other end, you might have a kid who came from a two parent home, who did well in school, who was mature, had a job and involved in different activities.”

“If that person is mature enough to do those things and does the murder, maybe he doesn’t deserve to be out,” he added. “… We’ve brought motions in all these cases, we see it as an opportunity to start to figure out what the Miller case means.”

Sepic said there’s legislation proposed in Lansing that would appropriate money to county prosecutors so they can hire investigators to look into defendants’ backgrounds and relieve some of the burden off of prosecutors’ offices.