SPRINGFIELD — Monday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling against life without parole for non-homicidal juvenile offenders is getting a mixed reaction from advocacy groups in Illinois.
 

Dora Larson, vice president of the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers, has been a victim advocate  since her 10-year old daughter, Victoria Larson, was brutally murdered by a 15-year old boy in 1979.  

Larson said the Supreme Court decision was not as bad as it could have been.

"We are so happy that they upheld and made no decision on juvenile lifers without parole who committed murder," Larson said, "because if this would have happened we would have had to have re-sentencing and parole every 5 years."

The Supreme Court was asked to rule in the Graham vs. Florida, the case of Terrance Graham who was twice convicted of armed robbery when he was 16 and 17, and given life without parole in Florida. The court found sentencing a juvenile to life without parole for non-homicidal crimes to be unconstitutional in a 5-4 decision. The court stopped short of ending life without parole sentencing for all juveniles.

Larson said the court's decision will affect 109 inmates around the country. Each of the 109 inmates will now have to go through a re-sentencing process and be subject to parole hearings every five years. She said there are currently between 1200 and 1500 juveniles serving life without parole, the majority of which were convicted for homicides.

Larson believes that some juveniles are hopeless and need to be locked up for life to protect society, although she doesn't say if she differentiates between homicidal and non-homicidal juveniles.

"I'm saying that there are juvenile offenders that can't be fixed. I know that," Larson said. "And that's the reason we have to have prisons so they don't reoffend. Usually if a juvenile is sentenced to life without parole they have a long, long criminal history. Often times it starts in preschool."

But juvenile protection agencies believe the Supreme Court ruling is a good thing.

Mary Reynolds, policy advocate at the Juvenile Justice Initiative, said the court's decision puts the United States closer to the rest of the world on juvenile justice.

"The international norm does not endorse using life without parole in any circumstances for juveniles," Reynolds said. "We believe this is a step in the right direction."

Reynolds also said the decision is important, because it reaffirmed the psychological and developmental differences between adults and children.