While not on the list of MAJR initiatives, there are other pieces of legislation that are allied to the causes which MAJR supports. Below are bills that members of the Maryland Alliance for Justice Reform are working for.
As noted by the ACLU:
The facts prove that life in prison without the possibility of parole (LWOP) is swift, severe, and certain punishment. The reality is that people sentenced to LWOP have been condemned to die in prison and that’s what happens: They die in prison of natural causes, just like the majority of people sentenced to death. The differences: Sentencing people to death by execution is three times more expensive than sentencing them to die in prison. And if we make a mistake by sentencing an innocent person to death, it can’t be fixed.
The synopsis for this bill states:
Establishing conditional parole as a form of release from incarceration for inmates over the age of 64 years under specified circumstances; establishing a means of initiating consideration by the Maryland Parole Commission of the appropriateness of granting conditional parole; requiring the Commission to provide for a conditional parole hearing on receipt of a specified request; etc.
Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR):
According to a study (the Vera Report) commissioned by the Superintendent of Corrections, Maryland’s use of segregation is higher than the national average. In the 2013-2014, IAHR, along with our partners, worked to get legislation introduced which would study the overuse with the intention of reducing isolated confinement through alternative approaches.
The synopsis for this bill states:
Requiring the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services to make an annual report on segregated confinement to the Governor on or before November 1; requiring specified information be included in the report; defining specified terms; and making provisions of the Act severable.
A nationwide legal think-tank—the Uniform Law Commission—recommends that each state take inventory of the negative consequences it imposes on those with criminal records. Both a defendant considering a guilty plea and the state authorities themselves then could make better decisions, changing outcomes.
A second alternative would increase the number & types of offense for which an offender could seek expungement of a prior minor criminal record after several years of good-behavior and no new offenses. (Violent felonies, sex offenses, and other serious offenses would not be eligible.)
The synopsis for this bill states:
This bill repeals a provision of law that provides that a person is not entitled to expungement of the person’s record if the petition for expungement is based on a specified case disposition and the person, since the disposition, has been convicted of a crime other than a minor traffic violation.
The synopsis for this bill states:
Altering specified qualifications for voter registration; providing that individuals discharged from incarceration are qualified to register to vote; requiring State authorities to notify individuals of their right to vote on release from incarceration, as specified; mandating that the notice include specified information; requiring the State Administrator of Elections to make arrangements with the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services to receive monthly reports concerning discharged felons; etc.
From the Montgomery County Civil Rights Coalition:
The centerpiece of coalition police reform efforts in Maryland this year is overhauling the so-called “Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights” (acronym LEOBOR or LEOBR), codified in Section 3 of the Public Safety article of the Maryland Code. The main vehicle for doing so is SB0566 (“Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights – Alterations”), displayed in its current form at the end of this post, and the corresponding house bill HB0698.
Through parole eligibility and sentencing review, the bill provides youth guilty of severe crimes the opportunity for hope coupled with the motivation for self-improvement. Eleven states have already eliminated life without parole as a sentencing option for juveniles, in part driven by the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama which found mandatory life without parole sentences unconstitutional for youth under eighteen, and we hope Maryland can join that list this year.
The synopsis of this bill states:
Authorizing parole eligibility for a person sentenced for an offense committed before the person’s 18th birthday under specified circumstances; authorizing a parole rehearing date no later than every 3 years for an inmate not granted parole after becoming eligible; authorizing representation of counsel for a specified person under specified circumstances
