Should life without parole be a sentence for the most heinous juvenile offenders?

Eight men who were serving life sentences in a Minnesota prison without the possibility of parole for crimes they committed as a juvenile could eventually be freed.

Since a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled that is unconstitutional, seven of the eight have been resentenced to include an opportunity for release after at least 30 years. The last is pending.

However, the law permitting a true life sentence remains in state statute.

“We should not leave an unconstitutional law on the books,” Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom told the House Public Safety and Security Policy and Finance Committee Wednesday.

Backstrom was part of the 19-member Commission on Juvenile Sentencing for Heinous Crimes, whose report was shared with the committee. No action was taken.

“The charge to the commission was to make recommendations to the Legislature regarding the factors that should be used to sentence juveniles who are convicted under the Heinous Crimes Act,” said John Kingrey, former executive director of the Minnesota County Attorney’s Association, who co-chaired the commission.

The 2012 ruling in Miller v. Alabama said sentencing a juvenile to life without parole is excessive under the Eighth Amendment for all but rare offenders whose crime reflects “irreparable corruption.” Combined with a 2016 decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, portions of Minnesota’s Heinous Crimes Act became unconstitutional when applied to juveniles.

WATCH Full video of the Feb. 28 House public safety committee meeting

For example, the state act says people convicted of first-degree premeditated murder shall be sentenced to life in prison without release possibility, explained retired Ramsey Court District Judge Kathleen Gearin, a commission co-chair.

She said Minnesota has two choices to get into compliance: specify factors used to sentence juveniles under the state act — such as pre-meditated first-degree murder or mental health issues — or eliminate life without parole for juvenile offenders and establish a penalty of life with the possibility of parole after a specified time period.

The commission did not issue a number of years request, Gearin said, because that’s a policy decision the Legislature should make.

Backstrom said the county attorney’s association, of which he is a board member, recommends abolishing life without parole for juveniles and replacing it with possible release after 25 years.

Rep. Kathy Lohmer (R-Stillwater) is working on a bill to address the situation.

“People that commit these heinous crimes, there needs to be consequences, but there also, it seems to me, needs to be hope … that they can have redemption, they can have their life restored,” she said. “If you have a situation where you never have a chance, how do you ever have hope?”

Minnesota is one of eight states not in compliance. Twenty-one states have never had life without parole for juveniles, 13 have a discretionary form of life without parole for juveniles and eight have changed laws to include factors from the Miller case. There was no discussion of a penalty for failure to comply or a deadline.

“Do we want to declare somebody at that age as irredeemable, that they are never going to change?” said Rep. Marion O'Neill (R-Maple Lake). “That’s essentially what Miller … is doing. It’s making that determination that, yes, we can sentence them to life. They are never going to change; they are never going to reform; they’re never going to have hope. I’m not comfortable as a legislator declaring that over someone’s life.”