PA Legislature faces Supreme Court deadline to establish sentence guidelines for felony murder

With just under a month to go until a Pennsylvania Supreme Court-imposed deadline, the state Senate passed a bill that would create new, strict sentencing guidelines for people charged with second degree murder, the Pennsylvania Capital-Star..

Also known as felony murder, the charge is used when someone is killed during the commission of another felony, even if the defendant did not intend to cause that person’s death. 

It can apply to people with varying degrees of culpability. That can include an armed robber who fatally injured but did not intend to kill their victim, as well as a getaway driver who was not present.

Until a state Supreme Court ruling in March, the charge came with a mandatory life without parole sentence. In a case revolving around a 36-year-old Allegheny County man who committed armed robbery with an accomplice who shot and killed someone, the court ruled requiring such sentences in all cases violated the state constitution’s ban on cruel punishment.

The court gave lawmakers 120 days to enact legislation addressing the ruling. But key lawmakers still have disagreements over how to move forward.

More than 1,100 people in Pennsylvania are currently serving life sentences without parole on second degree murder charges. The review of their cases could be the largest resentencing effort in the history of the commonwealth.

The GOP-led Senate bill, which passed with a 30-20 bipartisan vote, would impose a minimum 35 year sentence in almost all cases of second degree murder. It would still allow judges to pass life sentences if they believe them warranted.

If a defendant meets a strict set of criteria proving lesser culpability at sentencing, a judge would be allowed to impose a mitigated sentence between 10 and 40 years. Defendants would have to prove by a preponderance of evidence that they meet six requirements, including that they were not the only participant in the underlying felony; did not cause or intend to cause the victim’s death, nor solicit or conspire in the underlying felony; did not brandish, use or threaten to use a deadly weapon; have no reason to believe another participant would use a deadly weapon; and did not cause serious bodily injury to another.

The measure would also allow the parole board to consider the release of anyone charged with second degree murder who has served at least 35 years of a life sentence or is at least 70-years-old.

“We’ve worked hard to put together a plan that strikes the appropriate balance between judicial interpretations of the rights of convicted offenders, and community interest in seeking the appropriate punishment for those convicted of deadly crimes,” said Sen. Lisa Baker (R-Luzerne), the bill’s prime sponsor. 

Roxanne Horrell, the campaign director to end life without parole with the nonprofit Straight Ahead, said she believes the Senate’s bill remains too strict in its minimum sentencing requirements. She noted that even Derek Lee, the man at the center of the Supreme Court case, would not meet the bill’s criteria for receiving a mitigated sentence.

“It’s basically a 35-to-life bill,” Horrell said. “It attempts to do these mitigating categories, but it makes an impossible test to really fulfill … it looks good, but in actuality it will be something that’s very limited.

Horrell said that she hopes negotiations with the Democratic-led House will lead to a bill that would allow judges more latitude in sentencing and earlier eligibility for parole.

“We want a bill that’s going to bring as many people home as possible,” she said. “It’s very easy to make assumptions about who people are based on what they’ve done in the past. But I think a lot of these people are just people that made terrible mistakes.”

The Public Defenders Association of Pennsylvania also opposed the bill. In a joint press release with the Public Defenders Association of Philadelphia, the group said it “replicates the mistakes of Pennsylvania’s current, unconstitutional sentencing scheme with high mandatory sentences that provide narrow opportunity for relief.”

The groups added that it could cost between $34 million and $36 million to adequately represent the 1,100 Pennsylvanians who will have their cases reviewed.

“If Defenders aren’t provided with the resources to provide adequate representation and real mitigation, then this becomes just another unfunded mandate,” said Sara Jacobson, the executive director of the Pennsylvania Public Defenders Association of Pennsylvania. “Only real representation can cure this injustice. Without it, the courts risk new sentences that are just as cruel and just as unconstitutional.”

To become law, the Senate proposal will have to pass the House, where Democrats hold a razor-thin majority. That likely means approval from the Judiciary Committee chaired by Tim Briggs (D-Montgomery), who has introduced numerous bills to end mandatory life sentences for life without parole since entering office.

Briggs said, as it stands, he can not support the Senate plan.

“I haven’t voted for any mandatory minimum [sentences] in 16 years,” he told the Capital-Star. 

To read more CLICK HERE