A LIVING DEATH - American Civil Liberties Union

240 Pages·2013·6.03 MB·English

A LIVING DEATH
Life without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses
November 2013
At ALmiveriincag’s EDxpeeansteh:
TLhief eM awssi Itnhcaorcuetra Ptioan roof tlhee Efloderr lNy onviolent Offenses
© 2013 ACLU Foundation
June 2012
American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004
www.aclu.org
Cover image credit: Tim Gruber
Cover images:
A life sentence in Louisiana means life without the possibility of parole.
Because of harsh sentencing laws, about 95 percent of the 5,225 people
imprisoned at the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola will die there.
Louisiana is the state with the highest number of prisoners serving life
without parole for nonviolent offenses in the United States, with 429 such
prisoners, 91 percent of whom are Black according to the ACLU’s estimates.
(Top) Mary Bloomer, a prison security guard, watches as prisoners form a line
to travel to their prison jobs, which include farm labor. Angola is a massive
maximum security plantation prison, occupying fat delta land equal to the
size of Manhattan.
(Middle) George Alexander’s socks are marked with his nickname “Ghost.”
Alexander was a patient in the Angola hospice program who later succumbed to
brain and lung cancers. His nickname is short for “Casper, the Friendly Ghost.”
(Bottom) Hospice volunteers roll George Alexander’s coffn from the prison
hospital before burial in the prison’s cemetery.
Photo credit: Lori Waselchuk, “Grace Before Dying”
Back cover image:
The cemetery at Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola.
TABLE Of CONTENTs
I. Executive summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II. Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
III. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
A. DeFiNiNG “LiFe WiTHOUT PArOLe” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
B. DeFiNiNG “NONviOLeNT” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
IV. findings: The Use of Life without Parole for Nonviolent Crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
A. riSe iN LiFe-WiTHOUT-PArOLe SeNTeNCeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
B. NONviOLeNT CriMeS THAT reSULT iN LiFe-WiTHOUT-PArOLe SeNTeNCeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
C. WHO iS ServiNG LWOP FOr NONviOLeNT CriMeS: THe NUMBerS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
D. rACiAL DiSPAriTy iN LiFe-WiTHOUT-PArOLe SeNTeNCiNG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
V. How We Got Here: skyrocketing Extreme sentences and Mass Incarceration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
A. THe “WAr ON DrUGS” AND MANDATOry MiNiMUM SeNTeNCiNG LAWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
B. THree-STrikeS AND OTHer HABiTUAL OFFeNDer LAWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
C. CHANGeS TO PArOLe LAWS AND OTHer LiMiTATiONS ON reLeASe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
VI. Case studies: 110 Offenders sentenced to Die in Prison for Nonviolent Crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
A. FirST-TiMe NONviOLeNT OFFeNDerS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B. NONviOLeNT TeeNAGe OFFeNDerS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
C. TyiNG JUDGeS’ HANDS: MANDATOry LiFe WiTHOUT PArOLe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
D. LiFe WiTHOUT PArOLe FOr NONviOLeNT OFFeNSeS UNDer HABiTUAL OFFeNDer LAWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
i. State Habitual Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
ii. Federal Habitual Offenders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
e. LiFe WiTHOUT PArOLe FOr MAriJUANA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
F. LiFe WiTHOUT PArOLe DUe TO CrACk/POWDer COCAiNe SeNTeNCiNG DiSPAriTy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
G. AGiNG AND eLDerLy NONviOLeNT PriSONerS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
H. TerMiNALLy iLL NONviOLeNT PriSONerS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
VII. The Reality of serving Life without Parole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
A. WHAT iT MeANS TO Be SeNTeNCeD TO LiFe WiTHOUT PArOLe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
i. Hopelessness, Depression, and Suicidal Thoughts and Attempts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
ii. isolation from Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
B. PriSON CONDiTiONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
i. violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
ii. Solitary Confnement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
iii. restricted Access to Drug Treatment, vocational, and educational Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
C. LiMiTeD JUDiCiAL revieW OF DeATH-iN-PriSON SeNTeNCeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
D. virTUALLy NO CHANCe OF CLeMeNCy Or COMPASSiONATe reLeASe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
VIII. The financial Cost of sentencing Nonviolent Offenders to Life without Parole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
A. MeTHODOLOGy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
B. FiSCAL COST-SAviNGS eSTiMATeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
IX. C omparative International Practice and fundamental Rights to Humane Treatment,
Proportionate sentence, and Rehabilitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
A. OUT OF STeP WiTH THe WOrLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
B. DiSPrOPOrTiONATe SeNTeNCeS viOLATe iNTerNATiONAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
C. riGHT TO reHABiLiTATiON UNDer iNTerNATiONAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
D. U.S. CONSTiTUTiONAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
X. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
A Living Death: Life without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses
I. Executive summary
ife in prison without a chance of parole is, short of Bureau of Prisons, and state Departments of Corrections,
execution, the harshest imaginable punishment.1 Life obtained pursuant to Freedom of Information Act and open
Lwithout parole (LWOP) is permanent removal from records requests fled by the ACLU. Our research is also
society with no chance of reentry, no hope of freedom. based on telephone interviews conducted by the ACLU with
One should expect the American criminal justice system to prisoners, their lawyers, and family members; correspondence
condemn someone to die in prison only for the most serious with prisoners serving life without parole for nonviolent
offenses. offenses; a survey of 355 prisoners serving life without parole
for nonviolent offenses; and media and court records searches.
Yet across the country, thousands of people are serving life
sentences without the possibility of parole for nonviolent
crimes as petty as siphoning gasoline from an 18-wheeler,
sentenced to Die Behind Bars for
shoplifting three belts, breaking into a parked car and stealing
Nonviolent Crimes
a woman’s bagged lunch, or possessing a bottle cap smeared
with heroin residue. In their cruelty and harshness, these
Using data obtained from the Bureau of Prisons and state
sentences defy common sense. They are grotesquely out of
Departments of Corrections, the ACLU calculates that
proportion to the conduct they seek to punish. They offend
as of 2012, there were 3,278 prisoners serving LWOP for
the principle that all people have the right to be treated with
nonviolent drug and property crimes in the federal system
humanity and respect for their inherent dignity.
and in nine states that provided such statistics (there may well
be more such prisoners in other states). About 79 percent of
these 3,278 prisoners are serving LWOP for nonviolent drug
crimes. Nearly two-thirds of prisoners serving LWOP for
About 79 percent of the 3,278
nonviolent offenses nationwide are in the federal system; of
prisoners serving life without these, 96 percent are serving LWOP for drug crimes. More
than 18 percent of federal prisoners surveyed by the ACLU
parole were sentenced to die
are serving LWOP for their frst offenses. Of the states that
in prison for nonviolent drug sentence nonviolent offenders to LWOP, Louisiana, Florida,
Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Oklahoma
crimes.
have the highest numbers of prisoners serving LWOP for
nonviolent crimes, largely due to three-strikes and other
kinds of habitual offender laws that mandate an LWOP
This report documents the thousands of lives ruined and sentence for the commission of a nonviolent crime.
families destroyed by sentencing people to die behind bars
for nonviolent offenses, and includes detailed case studies The overwhelming majority (83.4 percent) of the LWOP
of 110 such people. It also includes a detailed fscal analysis sentences for nonviolent crimes surveyed by the ACLU
tallying the $1.784 billion cost to taxpayers to keep the 3,278 were mandatory. In these cases, the sentencing judges had
prisoners currently serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses no choice in sentencing due to laws requiring mandatory
incarcerated for the rest of their lives. minimum periods of imprisonment, habitual offender laws,
statutory penalty enhancements, or other sentencing rules
Our fndings are based on extensive documentation of the that mandated LWOP. Prosecutors, on the other hand, have
cases of 646 prisoners serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses immense power over defendants’ fates: whether or not to
in the federal system and nine states. The data in this report charge a defendant with a sentencing enhancement triggering
is from the United States Sentencing Commission, Federal an LWOP sentence is within their discretion. In case after
2 � �
2
” .tse r o y d en t t em b ton t o up gni os e u e b gni kil s ’ t I
—Dicky Joe Jackson, 55, who has served 17 years of a life-without-parole sentence because he transported
“and sold methamphetamine to pay for a life-saving bone marrow transplant and other medical treatments
for his son.3
no dias e gdu j gnicn e tn es eht , U LC A e eht y v r esac e b d w ei f o rbmu e tnatsbu n lai s eht r p w s r w ohen osi li s b eid l rab dnih e
PO W r o p esop tadnam eht d o ehs r o eh taht d L y r o e c r eht v f e o d ci t n o b r rc a c gni eLisal tfac emi sa h cu s( ” v“ tn eloi e sa d
v idni e lau di kat o e t nt oi rcsid ah on t d u b e r e o es o v t sa e cn e tn es vL rab a r e tfa tluasa r ci o f nt oi n o c a s rbmu e n eht o d r on g ,)th
s ’r o r t eso e uc r r v p eht e di o r o tnuo c a o c tni se cnatsmuc ric
v e d ci t n o e e c eht d c x e taht se cn e tn es PO W L ” o af e c d t “ e du l cni
grah c .n e oisic d gni
f o e r o cn f s e rae tn es a sa h y 053 cu s ru tan s ,napse fil la ’ n osp r e
guohtl A v-sel h r dna tn eloies a f v o sei rd tn eloi .selas gu n on
e siht ni d tno emuc d s rbmu e n eht ts s r A ,e eht sa gniki ra y
f o t rbmu e eht r n tn ese eu w w p elp oh rp e er o o p e r e li eid dnu r l t r f o e laf sesac PO dist uo l p f o eo cs eht rp e o r siht ,t W L o af e c d t
v f e v o d ci t rc tn n eloi o siht ni emi n b r on a c gni e r p ni tfa n osi gnicn f e o ntatse finam gnil oi buo tn es em t a niam e e r eht tx r e r y
e du l cni ton o f d e T o sdnasuoht eh v e ba d o p . ton elp e o tnuo r c y . tnuo r p c siht ni seicilo y
L� ife without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses 3
Nonviolent Crimes that Result in • possession of 32 grams of marijuana with
intent to distribute
Life-without-Parole sentences
• acting as a go-between in the sale of $10 of
We documented scores of cases in which people were marijuana to an undercover offcer
sentenced to LWOP for nonviolent drug crimes of possession,
sale, or distribution of marijuana, methamphetamine, crack • selling a single crack rock
and powder cocaine, heroin, or other drugs, including the • verbally negotiating another man’s sale of two
following: small pieces of fake crack to an undercover
offcer
• possession of a crack pipe
• serving as a middleman in the sale of $20 of
• possession of a bottle cap containing a trace, crack to an undercover offcer
unweighable amount of heroin
• sharing several grams of LsD with Grateful
• having a trace amount of cocaine in clothes Dead concertgoers
pockets that was so minute it was invisible to
the naked eye and detected only in lab tests • having a stash of over-the-counter
decongestant pills that could be manufactured
• having a single, small crack rock at home into methamphetamine
I think a life sentence
for what you have done in
“
this case is ridiculous. It is
a travesty. I don’t have any
discretion about it. I don’t
agree with it, either. And
I want the world and the
record to be clear on that.
This is just silly. But as I say, I
4
don’t have any choice.”
—Federal District Court Judge James r.
Spencer, to Landon Thompson*, while
sentencing him to mandatory life without parole
for selling small amounts of crack cocaine at a
time, over a period of weeks, out of a hotel room
in a run-down section of richmond in order to
support his drug addiction
* Pseudonym used at prisoner’s request.
4 � �
In cases documented by the ACLU, the nonviolent property
vŽ Oiai� l• a� i� farliNanvOsniO� l� i
crimes that resulted in life-without-parole sentences include
rOi� wOa� Ol� n� ia� l� ž�
the following:
In the cases we documented, the prisoners serving LWOP
i— n� nln”� ai� nOiv�• ii� n� Ol� i� v• l•
are generally frst-time drug offenders or nonviolent repeat
i— i� s˜ lƒ™•� l� i� œ� O” l� a� Oi� Orin� Ol� i� s˜ i•� offenders. These nonviolent lifers include drug couriers;
l� ni� i‹„Ÿ l� � � i� iƒ� Ol� ilO–� Nia” l” ¡ drug addicts who sold small amounts of drugs in order to
support their addictions; petty thieves; and girlfriends or
i— O” l� a� Oi� Orin� Ol� i� Nl� v•� l�
wives who were caught up in the mass arrests of members
of drug conspiracies and, because they knew little about
i— a� v” Oa� i� O� a� l� irO� i� i� ns� •
their partners’ or ex-partners’ drug activities, were unable
i— n� la� i� nOOi� rO� i� i� nOOi� v� liƒ iƒ� i� Nlaƒ� i� to trade information for more lenient sentences. Some did
v•� al� irO� i� i� ƒ � - distribute large quantities of drugs but have been incarcerated
for decades and have demonstrated both remorse and
i— v� Oa�” rnai� nvl� lil– n� i� rO� i� i� lƒ n�” l� n� i
rehabilitation. Others were sentenced to LWOP for crimes
n� Ol�
they committed as teenagers, in some cases for their minor
i— v� Oa�” rnai� l� l� i� � aƒ a� ni� l�• � � roles in drug conspiracies starting when they were as young
as 15 years old. Several are Vietnam War veterans who were
i— v� Oa�” rnai� nNOil˜ l� i�- rO� i� i� n� vl� nai• n� Ol�
introduced to drugs during their military service and battled
i— na•� i� i� nll� a� a� Oi•� a• s• � i� N� i• iƒ� i� O” Nli� addiction after leaving the military. The vast majority come
O• l� n� li� rO� i� i� n�•� � ivOsl� from poor families and did not graduate from high school.
Most are Black, and in some cases the circumstances of their
i— l�– a•� i� an� Oii� O�• l� iƒ a� s¢ Oi� n� Ol� iai� nvli
stop, search, and subsequent arrests appear to have involved
a� l�ƒ iOrinvlia� v� n
racial profling. Some are mentally ill and imprisoned for
behavior directly related to their mental illnesses. Others
Other nonviolent crimes that resulted in life-without-parole
spiraled into drug addiction when they could not fnd work,
sentences include the following:
and some began selling drugs to pay the bills after they lost
i— a•� i� i� s�ƒ l•� i� nvl� n� inOii� O” a� l• iOrl•› i� their jobs or to pay off medical debts incurred when they
Nval� ivs•ƒ� rrliƒ ai� nvlii•�– Orii� n�” O� i� � • were uninsured.
i— O” l� a� Oi� Orii� l�› i� i-– i� O• a� n• liƒ rlO� � Most of the nonviolent crimes for which these prisoners
are serving life without parole would be more appropriately
i— na•� i� i� s–� a� l� in� lr” n� vli� œ� s� i� rO� i� nvlai�
addressed outside of the criminal justice system altogether,
v� l� iƒ vOl�
some by signifcantly shorter incarceration, and some with
These cases are not outliers or fukes. Sentencing nonviolent more readily available drug treatment and mental health
offenders to die in prison is the direct outcome of harsh resources. In many of the cases documented by the ACLU,
sentencing laws. This is the end result of policies put in offenders committed their crimes because of drug addictions
place in the 1980s and 1990s: mothers and fathers separated and had never been offered state-sponsored drug treatment,
from their children forever, toddlers and teens left parentless even during previous brief stints in jail and despite their
for a lifetime, aging and infrm parents left without family, willingness to enter treatment. Many of these addicts told the
frst-time nonviolent offenders permanently denied a second ACLU they asked for treatment after previous drug arrests
chance, and young Black and low-income men and women but were denied. When they reoffended, they were locked up
locked up for the rest of their lives at as young as 18 years old. for the rest of their lives.
L� ife without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses 5
fIGURE 1
Racial Disparity in Life-without-
Percent Black prisoners serving LWOP for nonviolent
Parole sentencing offenses by state
100%
There is a staggering racial disparity in life-without-
parole sentencing for nonviolent offenses. Blacks are 80% 91%
disproportionately represented in the nationwide prison and 79%
jail population, but the disparities are even worse among 60% 70% 68%
the nationwide LWOP population and worse still among the 60% 57% 60%
nonviolent LWOP population. Based on data provided by the 40%
United States Sentencing Commission and state Departments
of Corrections, the ACLU estimates that nationwide, 65.4 20%
percent of prisoners serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses
are Black, 17.8 percent are white, and 15.7 percent are Latino. 0%
In the 646 cases examined for this report, the ACLU found
that 72.9 percent of these documented prisoners serving The rate of Latinos serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses
LWOP for nonviolent offenses are Black, 19.8 percent are ranges from a high of 12.7 per 1,000,000 residents in Louisiana
white, and 6.9 percent are Latino. to 9 in Oklahoma, 7.32 in Florida, 1.25 in Illinois, 11.24 in
the federal system, and 0 in South Carolina and Mississippi.
According to data collected and analyzed by the ACLU, Black
Latinos are serving life without parole for nonviolent crimes
prisoners comprise 91.4 percent of the nonviolent LWOP
at a rate that is almost 8 times the rate of whites in Illinois and
prison population in Louisiana, 78.5 percent in Mississippi,
almost twice the rate of whites in Louisiana.
70 percent in Illinois, 68.2 percent in South Carolina, 60.4
percent in Florida, 57.1 percent in Oklahoma, and 60 percent Blacks are sentenced to life without parole for nonviolent
in the federal system. In the federal system, Blacks were offenses at rates that suggest unequal treatment and that
sentenced to LWOP for nonviolent crimes at 20 times the cannot be explained by white and Black defendants’ differential
rate of whites. In Louisiana, the ACLU’s survey found that involvement in crime alone.
Blacks were 23 times more likely than whites to be sentenced
to LWOP for a nonviolent crime. The racial disparities range Case studies
from 33-to-1 in Illinois to 18-to-1 in Oklahoma, 8-to-1 in
Florida, and 6-to-1 in Mississippi. The following case studies, drawn from the hundreds of cases
documented by the ACLU, demonstrate the devastating impact
TABLE 1
of LWOP sentences on people convicted of nonviolent crimes.
Times more likely Blacks sentenced to LWOP for a
The federal prisoners serving life without parole for nonviolent
nonviolent crime than whites
drug crimes whose cases are profled in greater detail in this
report include the following:
florida 7.94
Ricky Minor, a father of three and
Illinois 33.25
self-described meth addict at the time
Louisiana 23.1 of his crime, was sentenced to life
without parole for attempting to
Mississippi 6.02
manufacture methamphetamine after
a gram of methamphetamine and
Oklahoma 17.97
over-the-counter decongestants were
south Carolina 5.25 found in his home in the Florida
Panhandle. Under state law, he would
federal system 20.38
have faced a two-and-a-half-year

6 � �
Louisiana
Mississippi
Illinois
South Carolina
Florida
Oklahoma
Federal
There’s an answer to this
without being so extreme. But
“
we’re still-living-20-years-ago
extreme. Throw the human
away. He’s worthless. Boom:
up the river. And yet, he didn’t
even kill anybody. He didn’t do
anything, but he just had an
addiction he couldn’t control
and he was trying to support it
robbing. That’s terrible to rob
people—I’ve been robbed, I
hate it. I want something done
to him. But not all his life.
That’s extreme. That’s cruel and
5
unusual punishment to me.”
—Burl Cain, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary
at Angola
sentence, but he was indicted by a federal prosecutor after he l� l•� iLO� ,� a college student
refused to cooperate by implicating others. Minor chose to with no prior criminal record, was
plead guilty after his lawyer advised him that refusal to do so sentenced to three life-without-parole
would likely trigger prosecution of his wife, which would have sentences at age 23 for playing a minor
role in two planned large drug
left their children without parents. The federal sentencing
deals—one of which did not take
judge objected to the mandatory LWOP sentence, which he
place—in which he was not the buyer,
said “far exceeds whatever punishment would be appropriate,”
seller, or supplier of the drugs. While
but under the law he had no discretion to take into account the in his fnal semester of college, Aaron
circumstances of the case. Minor’s nuclear family has fallen introduced a classmate to a cocaine
apart since his incarceration 12 years ago. He and his wife dealer he had known in high school, was present at one cocaine
divorced, and his stepson died of a drug overdose. Now long sale, and traveled from Mobile to Houston with cash to
sober, he remains extremely close with his daughter, a self- purchase cocaine for a planned drug purchase that did not
described “daddy’s girl” who was only seven when he was happen. He received a longer sentence than his more culpable
incarcerated. See case study p. 77 co-conspirators, all but one of whom have been released from
L� ife without Parole for Nonviolent Offenses 7
prison (the last one is scheduled to be released in 2014). The stayed clean despite being ineligible for drug treatment due to
prosecutor and judge in Aaron’s case have both supported his the fact that he will never be released from prison. See case
petition for commutation, a fact that was eliminated from the study p. 101
commutation review by the federal government. Now 43,
Aaron has spent almost 20 years in prison. See case study p. 40 fate Vincent Winslow was homeless when he acted as a
go-between in the sale of two small bags of marijuana, worth
sharanda Purlette Jones, a $10 in total, to an undercover police offcer. Police did not
mother with no prior criminal record, arrest the white seller, even though they witnessed the entire
was sentenced to mandatory life transaction and found the marked bill used to make the
without parole for conspiracy to controlled drug buy in his pocket. Winslow, who is Black, was
distribute crack cocaine based almost sentenced to mandatory life without parole under Louisiana’s
entirely on the testimony of co- four-strikes law based on prior convictions for simple
conspirators who received reduced (unarmed) burglaries committed 14 and 24 years earlier and
sentences for their testimony. All 105 a nearly decade-old conviction for possession of cocaine. See
people arrested as part of the case study p. 157
conspiracy in her majority-white
Texas town were Black. Other than a taped phone call during Timothy Jackson is serving life
which she agreed to ask a friend where two government without parole for shoplifting a jacket
informants might be able to buy drugs, there was no physical worth $159 from a Maison Blanche
evidence, including no drugs or video surveillance, presented department store in New Orleans in
at trial to connect her to drug-dealing with her co- 1996. Jackson, who was 36 at the time,
conspirators. She has been incarcerated for more than 14 worked as a restaurant cook and had
years and carefully apportions her allotted 300 monthly only a sixth-grade education. A store
minutes for non-legal calls to speak 10 minutes each day with security agent followed Jackson, who
her 22-year-old daughter, who was only nine when her put the jacket down on a newspaper
mother was imprisoned. See case study p. 41 stand and tried to walk away when he
realized he was being followed. At the time, Jackson’s crime
The state prisoners serving LWOP for nonviolent offenses carried a two-year sentence for a frst offender; it now carries
under three- and four-strikes laws whose cases are profled in a six-month sentence. Instead, the court sentenced Jackson to
this report include the following: mandatory life without parole, using a two-decades-old
juvenile conviction for simple (unarmed) robbery and two
Kevin Ott is serving life without simple car-burglary convictions to sentence him under
parole for three-and-a-half ounces of Louisiana’s four-strikes law. Jackson has served 16 years in
methamphetamine. When Ott was on prison. See case study p. 116
parole for marijuana charges, parole
offcers found the drug and Paul Carter has been incarcerated
paraphernalia in a warrantless search for 16 years, serving life without
of the trailer in which he was living. parole for possession of a trace
He was sentenced to mandatory amount of heroin residue that was so
LWOP under Oklahoma’s state minute it could not be weighed.
habitual drug offender law based on Carter began using drugs at an early
prior convictions arising from two arrests, one for having a age and struggled with heroin
small amount of meth in his pocket while exiting a bar, and addiction for years, but he never
the other for possession and manufacture of marijuana. received drug treatment before he was
During his incarceration after both of these arrests, he sentenced to die in prison. Two New
repeatedly requested treatment for his drug addiction but was Orleans police offcers investigating narcotics activity at a
denied. Now 50, Ott has served 17 years in prison and has housing project observed Carter standing on a street corner,
8 � �