In 2011, a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Miller v. Alabama led California lawmakers to pass legislation that would give prisoners convicted as youths a second chance. One such individual is William Palmer, who at the age of 17 held an off-duty police officer at gunpoint demanding money. The Marshall Project recently examined Palmer’s case.

As a minor, Mr. Palmer ordered the off-duty officer to go to an ATM to withdraw cash. However, the victim was also armed and managed to fire a salvo of bullets at the perpetrator. Palmer was wounded in the knee and eventually apprehended.

The year was 1988, and it was a time when several states were simultaneously passing ‘tough on crime’ laws. As such, someone like Palmer could receive a life sentence for attempted armed robbery. The judge presiding over Palmer’s case decided to hand down a life sentence with the possibility of parole, according to the exposé. However, all of Palmer’s attempts to be released from prison were rejected by the parole board; Mr. Palmer was denied on ten separate occasions over the years.

Palmer was finally released from prison after filing an appeal, but he is not in the clear yet. His case is poised to go before the California Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court’s Decision Could Impact Thousands of Prisoners

Palmer was expelled from school in 10th grade and left home at 16, according to the article. There is a growing body of research that suggests that the decisions people make as young people are not a predictor of a life of crime — Mr. Palmer’s attorneys plan to cite those types of studies before the Supreme Court.

While in prison, Palmer did have a few minor infractions that may have influenced the parole board’s repeated rejections. However, Palmer’s time behind bars was not wasted; he earned a GED and an associate degree, the article reports. What’s more, he took part in programs to help him better understand the impact of his crimes.

The issue at hand, the California Supreme Court must decide whether the parole board took Palmer’s youth into account when they rejected his release. The Court of Appeal found that the parole board had not considered his age at the time of his crime and ordered the parole board to conduct another hearing which led to his release.

However, the California Attorney General’s Office asked the Supreme Court to review the case. If the justices side with Palmer, it could lay out a path to release for other young offenders serving lengthy sentences. If he loses, it’s back to prison, and Palmer will have to go before the board once again.

“I hope it means more people will see freedom earlier for things they did when they were children,” said Megan Havstad, Palmer’s lawyer.

California Juvenile Law Attorney

Please reach out to The Law Offices of Katie Walsh if your son or daughter requires legal assistance. Attorney Walsh has significant experience advocating for young people and their families. We invite you to request a free consultation to learn more about how we can help you during this difficult time.

In 2016, we covered the important topic of California Proposition 57 and its implications regarding juvenile law. Considering the fact that many young people do not fully understand the consequences of their actions, voters across the state approved the passing of Prop 57. The law takes the power of deciding which minors are tried in adult court out of the hands of prosecutors; instead, under the new legislation discretion is given to judges to determine in which court teenagers belong.

It was still unclear at the time of Proposition 57’s approval and signing into state law how it would affect minors who were already looking at standing trial in adult court. Would the new law be retroactive for the thousands of minors who were awaiting trial in adult court in November of 2016? A decision was reached regarding such individuals; on February 1, 2018, the California Supreme Court broadly expanded the scope of Prop. 57, according to U.S. News & World Report. The highest court in the state ruled that the law applies to pending cases at the time of the vote.

A Chance for Rehabilitation

The adult criminal justice system is a far cry from the juvenile court regarding punishment. Minors convicted of a crime in such cases can expect much stiffer sentences. The Supreme Court’s decision brings with it new hope for young people across the state. Please keep in mind that the law isn’t any guarantee that a juvenile will escape adult court, just that they are entitled to a special hearing to decide if the higher adult court is warranted.

“While a person convicted of serious crimes in adult court can be punished by a long prison sentence, juveniles are generally treated quite differently, with rehabilitation as the goal,” said Associate Justice Ming Chin, writing for the state Supreme Court. “The possibility of being treated as a juvenile in juvenile court — where rehabilitation is the goal — rather than being tried and sentenced as an adult can result in dramatically different and more lenient treatment.”

The Supreme Court also decided that Prop. 57 should even apply to youths appealing their convictions, according to the article. Beyond juvenile law, Proposition 57 allows adult felons the ability to try to obtain parole faster. California corrections officials have more discretion than before in regard to granting early release credits.

Juvenile Offense Attorney

At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we specialize in defending juvenile offenders in California. Please contact our office if your juvenile son or daughter is facing criminal charges. Having the right defense attorney in your corner can make a significant difference; we can help you achieve the best possible outcome for your child.