S3079

An Act concerning review of certain juvenile sentences and supplementing chapter 44 of Title 2C of the New Jersey 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 possibility of parole for a juvenile offender who committed a nonhomicide offense on the grounds that there was no adequate penal justification for the sentence and 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, 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.

2. a. For the purposes of this section, “juvenile offender” means a person sentenced to imprisonment for an offense committed when the person was under the age of 18.

b. 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, provided however:

(1) a juvenile offender convicted of murder under N.J.S.2C:11-3 shall serve at least 30 years of the original sentence; and

(2) a juvenile offender convicted of any other criminal offense shall serve at least 20 years of the original sentence.

c. A juvenile offender shall not be eligible to petition the court for a review of the offender’s sentence pursuant to this section if the offender has a conviction of murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, or carjacking that was committed after reaching the age of 18 years.

d. A juvenile offender who has petitioned the Superior Court for a review of sentence pursuant to subsection b. of this section shall not submit a second or subsequent petition for at least five years after the court’s ruling on the previous petition.

e. At least five years prior to the date a juvenile offender is eligible to petition for a review of sentence pursuant to the provisions of this section, the Department of Corrections shall conduct an assessment of the juvenile offender and identify appropriate reentry programming and services; at least 18 months before the eligibility date, the department shall notify the juvenile offender of the right to petition for a review of the original sentence.

f. A juvenile offender who is eligible for a review of sentence pursuant to this section shall have the right to be represented by counsel and to have a public defender appointed if the offender cannot afford counsel.

g. The juvenile offender shall be entitled to submit to the court statements of family members, friends, school personnel, faith leaders, and representatives from organizations with knowledge of the juvenile offender before the offense or of the offender’s growth and maturity since the offense was committed.

h. Mitigating factors the court shall consider when determining whether a juvenile’s sentence should be modified include, but are not to be limited to:

(1) the juvenile offender’s age, maturity, and impetuosity at the time of the offense;

(2) the juvenile offender’s intellectual capacity and ability to appreciate the risks and consequences of the conduct;

(3) the level of the juvenile offender’s participation in the offense, and in particular whether the juvenile offender was a relatively minor participant in the offense or acted under duress or the domination of another;

(4) peer or familial pressure on the juvenile offender to engage in criminal conduct;

(5) family and community environment and the juvenile offender’s involvement in the child welfare system;

(6) the juvenile offender’s school records and special education evaluations during incarceration;

(7) trauma history of the juvenile offender, including sexual, physical, or emotional abuse before the juvenile offender committed the offense;

(8) the juvenile offender’s ability to meaningfully participate in the offender’s defense, including considerations of the ignorance, incompetence, or incapacity of youth that may have affected the procedural fairness of the original trial;

(9) the juvenile offender’s sincerity and sustained remorse for the offense;

(10) the degree of risk to society the juvenile offender currently poses compared to that posed when originally sentenced;

(11) the juvenile offender’s capacity for rehabilitation, and growth and maturity, as determined by psychological evaluations and risk assessments administered by licensed psychologists or other appropriate medical professionals, as well as the diminished culpability of juveniles as compared to adults; this paragraph shall not be construed to require a mental health evaluation; and

(12) any other mitigating factor or circumstance that the court may deem appropriate.

i. Notwithstanding the provisions of this act, any court rule, or any other provision of law to the contrary, a Superior Court judge, upon consideration of a petition filed pursuant to subsection b. of this section, may modify, reduce or suspend the offender’s sentence, including any minimum or mandatory sentence, or a portion of the sentence, in the discretion of the court. If the court determines that a change in the offender’s original sentence is not warranted, the court shall issue a written order stating the reasons for denying modification. Nothing in this act, however, shall require the court to grant a sentence modification pursuant to this act.

3. This act shall take effect immediately and shall retroactively apply to juvenile offenders sentenced prior to the effective date of the act.

STATEMENT

This bill establishes that criminal offenders who, as juveniles received lengthy terms of imprisonment without parole eligibility that amount to life imprisonment, have the opportunity to have their sentences reviewed.

Under the bill, juveniles who received a sentence of 30 years or more imprisonment without parole eligibility may petition the Superior Court to have their sentences reviewed. A juvenile offender who was convicted of murder is required to serve at least 30 years of his or her sentence before being eligible for the hearing. A juvenile offender who was convicted of any other criminal offense is required to serve at least 20 years before becoming eligible. Juvenile offenders who have a conviction of murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, or carjacking that was committed after turning 18 years old would not be eligible to have their sentences reviewed under the bill.

In preparation for the court’s review of the juvenile offender’s sentence, the Department of Corrections is required to assess the juvenile offender and identify appropriate reentry programming and services to be offered to the juvenile offender. The department also is required to notify the juvenile offender 18 months before eligibility that he or she has the right to request a review or sentence.

A juvenile offender has the right to be represented by counsel during a review hearing and to have a public defender appointed if the offender cannot afford counsel. The juvenile offender also may provide the court with statements of family members, friends, school personnel, faith leaders, and representatives from organizations with knowledge of the juvenile offender before the offense or of the offender’s growth and maturity since the offender committed the offense.

The court is to consider the following mitigating factors when reviewing the juvenile offender’s sentence: