WASHINGTON — Three years ago, the Supreme Court struck down automatic life sentences with no chance of release for teenage killers. Now it will weigh whether that should extend retroactively to hundreds of older cases.
In the 5-4 decision in 2012, Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority that judges weighing prison terms for young offenders must take into account “the mitigating qualities of youth,” among them immaturity and the failure to understand the consequences of their actions.
The question for the court to be argued Tuesday is whether that decision in Miller vs. Alabama should be extended retroactively to hundreds of other inmates whose convictions are final.
The new case, Montgomery vs. Louisiana, was brought by Henry Montgomery, who is now 69 years old and has been behind bars since he shot dead a sheriff’s deputy in 1963. He is serving a life sentence.
Through legislative action or court rulings, 18 states have allowed inmates such as Montgomery to be given new sentences or to ask for their release, according to The Sentencing Project. Louisiana is among seven states that have declined to apply the Supreme Court ruling retroactively.
Ground-breaking decisions in criminal law often are applied retroactively. Montgomery’s lawyers say the court’s decision to outlaw automatic life sentences for teenagers is such a case.
Supporters of the life-in-prison sentences counter that finality is important for the legal system and relatives of the victims.
