Second Chances Resource Library

This bill, introduced in the 2023 legislative session, would make people eligible for a second look after 15 years of incarceration. The bill lays out eligibility, procedures, and factors for the court to consider when determining whether to modify a sentence.

Scholars have championed “second look” statutes as a decarceral tool. Second look statutes allow certain incarcerated people to seek resentencing after having served a portion of their sentences. This Essay weighs the advantages and disadvantages of these statutes as applied to children sentenced to die in prison and argues that focusing on this small, discrete group may be a digestible entry point for more conservative states who fear widespread resentencing. Moreover, because early data indicates that children convicted of homicide and released as adults have very low recidivism rates, second look beneficiaries are likely to pose little threat to public safety. While resentencing and even releasing these individuals would not directly result in mass decarceration, it would serve as a litmus test for expanding second look statutes to adults convicted of violent crimes—the very group for whom meaningful decarceral efforts must ultimately be aimed.

The Essay also argues that second look legislation has the potential to redress two specific sentencing problems common to cases involving children: the inability to accurately assess an individual’s capacity for change and racially discriminatory sentencing outcomes. To redress these problems, and to avoid reflexive impositions of original sentences, this Essay recommends three critical additions to juvenile second look statutes: automatic eligibility for resentencing at age twenty-five, jury resentencing, and inadmissibility of the defendant’s original sentence.

Millions rallied behind Adnan Syed, whom the system gave a second look. This article looks at why many others serving extreme sentences deserve a second look, too.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Wyoming’s compassionate release program, “Medical Parole,” received a grade of F, and Wyoming’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Wisconsin has two compassionate release programs. “Sentence Modification Due to Extraordinary Health Condition or Age” received a grade of C+ and “Parole Due to Extraordinary Circumstances” received a grade of F. Wisconsin’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. West Virginia’s two compassionate release programs, “Executive Clemency Due to a Life-Threatening Medical Condition” and “Medical Respite” both received grades of F, and West Virginia’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Virginia has three compassionate release programs. “Conditional Release Based on Terminal Illness” and “Executive Medical Clemency” both received grades of F, while “Geriatric Conditional Release” received a grade of B. Virginia’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Vermont has two compassionate release programs. “Medical Parole” received a grade of D and “Medical Furlough” received a grade of F. Vermont’s overall grade is D-.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Utah’s compassionate release program, “Compassionate Release,” received a grade of F, and Utah’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Texas has two compassionate release programs. “Medically Recommended Intensive Supervision” received a grade of B and “Emergency Medical Reprieve” received a grade of F. Texas’ overall grade is D-.