Policy Impacts on Teenagers Sentenced to Life without Parole: A Three-State Case Study

Background and Purpose: At a single-year peak in 1996, more than 150 juveniles were sentenced to life without parole (JLWOP) for homicide crimes—increased from ~20 per year in the 1980’s—largely due to mandatory sentencing policies in place across the United States. JLWOP sentences were excessively imposed in urban communities and disproportionately imposed on Black and Latinx males. Two decades later, more than 2,800 individuals were serving JLWOP sentences, and each state was left to establish its own policies for resentencing following Montgomery. This study examines the impact of state policies on juvenile lifer experiences in California, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—states that together, accounted for nearly half of the nation’s JLWOP sentences.

Methods: This phenomenological, multisite case study (N=6) used data from three independent, qualitative studies conducted in separate states to explore life-course experiences of former juvenile lifers sentenced between 1990-1995 and then released (M=25 years served). At each site, participants were purposively recruited through community partner agencies. For this study, participants were eligible based on their match across race and ethnicity (Black or Latinx), sex (males), offense (conviction of homicide), and age at sentence (17-years-old). Participants were 41-47 years-old (M=44) at the time of the interview and were 10 to 36 months (M=21) out from their release. To date, none of these men have returned to jail or prison. Transcripts from interviews (M=137 mins) were analyzed using holistic and theoretical coding.

Results: Findings demonstrate differences by state related to the policies used in sentencing and resentencing, as well as differences by state related to carceral contexts, access to re-entry supports, and parole. Despite these state-level differences, participants shared similar narratives on early life contexts (socio-historical influences, the role of the “streets” in their development, fatalistic worldviews), transformation while incarcerated (the role of hope, relationships, and spirituality), and re-entry experiences (initial challenges and generativity).

Conclusions and Implications: This study has implications for research, policy, and practice. The findings highlight the importance of further research to understand the impacts of long-term incarceration to inform policies and state legislation related to life and long-term sentences, as well as decarceration policies for those serving long-term sentences. Further, the results provide insight for how to support successful re-entry, including community-based prevention and intervention opportunities.