High court likely to settle juvenile law

Pulaski County Circuit judge rules law unconstitutional

From left: Christopher S. Segerstrom, 45, was convicted of capital murder in 1986. Dennis Wayne Lewis, 59, was convicted of capital murder and assault with intent to rob in 1976. James Dean Vancleave, 54, was convicted of capital murder in 1978.
From left: Christopher S. Segerstrom, 45, was convicted of capital murder in 1986. Dennis Wayne Lewis, 59, was convicted of capital murder and assault with intent to rob in 1976. James Dean Vancleave, 54, was convicted of capital murder in 1978.

FAYETTEVILLE — A Little Rock judge’s ruling a new Arkansas juvenile sentencing law is unconstitutional means the Arkansas Supreme Court will likely have to sort things out, Washington County Prosecutor Matt Durrett said Friday.

Three teens, three murders

• Christopher Segerstrom, 45, took Barbara Thompson into a wooded area behind the Lewis Plaza Apartments several blocks west of the University of Arkansas on July 26, 1986. Segerstrom, who was 15 at the time, sexually assaulted her before bashing her head with a 40-pound rock, crushing her skull, and suffocating her. He was convicted of capital murder.

• James Dean Vancleave, 55, of Springdale was convicted of capital murder for killing 23-year-old Debra King. Vancleave was 16 when he killed King on Jan. 29, 1978, at a convenience store on Elm Springs Road.

• Dennis Wayne Lewis was ordered released from prison last fall, because he had served 30 years in prison and in his case, no valid sentencing options were available. Lewis, 59, of Wichita, Kan., was convicted of capital murder and assault with intent to rob. Lewis was 17 when he killed Jared Jerome Cobb at Cobb’s Western Store and Pawn Shop in Springdale during an armed robbery April 8, 1974.

Source: Staff report

Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen ruled Thursday the new law requiring the resentencing of juveniles who were found guilty and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole doesn’t go far enough in eliminating mandatory sentences. Griffen said the law is unconstitutional for any minor given a no-parole sentence and those offenders should be given a new sentencing hearing before a judge or jury.

Ruling prompted sentencing changes

A divided U.S. Supreme Court said in January an earlier ruling striking down automatic life terms with no chance of parole for teen murderers should be applied retroactively. The ruling means inmates convicted years ago must be considered for parole or given a new sentence. The decision doesn’t bar judges from sentencing teen killers to life in prison, but the court has said life sentences for teens should be rare, and only used in the worst cases. The court’s ruling affected more than 1,000 prison inmates across the

country who were involved in murders while they were teens. Some of those inmates have been behind bars more than 50 years. Last June, Lincoln County Circuit Judge Jodi Raines Dennis vacated the sentences of 56 inmates in Arkansas who were minors when they were sentenced to life without parole.

Source: Staff report

“I think it just guarantees that it’s gonna have to be settled by the Supreme Court,” Durrett said Friday. “That’s what it’s for, not just disputes in a particular case, but when you’ve got different jurisdictions having different rulings. They’re the ones that make the call.”

Act 539 automatically made juveniles sentenced to life in prison eligible for parole after serving 30 years for capital murder or after 25 years for first-degree murder.

Washington County has three men who fit the criteria: James Vancleave, Chris Segerstrom and Dennis Lewis. Vancleave was released from prison. Lewis and Segerstrom were resentenced by Washington County Circuit Judge Mark Lindsay according to the new state law and are awaiting parole hearings. Lindsay denied Lewis and Vancleave resentencing hearings, where evidence is presented to decide a sentence.

Kent McLemore and Ben Crabtree, Segerstrom’s lawyers, have argued the new state law doesn’t preclude new sentencing hearings. Last week they asked Lindsay to reconsider his earlier ruling and allow Segerstrom to have a hearing.

“Defendant is entitled to individualized resentencing by a judge or jury and a parole hearing does not suffice,” according to the motion.

Durrett has opposed the notion of new sentencing hearings, arguing resentencing under the new state law is proper.

Earlier this month, another circuit judge in Pulaski County, Judge Herb Wright, issued a separate ruling questioning the constitutionality of Act 539, but declined to toss it. Wright granted five inmates new sentencing hearings, which was a departure from the guidelines in the state law.

Wright’s decision was appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court. Griffen’s ruling is also expected to be appealed to the high court.

“You could have 20 different judges ruling on this and have 20 different rulings,” Durrett said. “If you consider Judge Lindsay’s ruling, you throw in what Judge Griffen did and then Herb Wright had a different ruling. He ruled it was unconstitutional as it applied to the defendants that he was ruling on, which is slightly different than saying that the statute is unconstitutional as it was applied to those defendants. And, those are just the ones that I know of, I don’t know how many other judges have decided the issue.”

Griffen’s ruling came in the case of Brandon Hardman, who was sentenced in 2002 to life without parole for a murder committed when he was 16.

Hardman was one of the 58 inmates at the Department of Correction affected by a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court that juvenile life-without-parole sentences were unconstitutional.

Griffen said Hardman is entitled to have his new sentence determined by a judge or jury that will take an individual look at his case, not a law written by the General Assembly.

According to Griffen’s ruling, Act 539 violates both the U.S. and Arkansas constitutions as well as the separation of powers between the branches of government.

“Here, again, the legislature overstepped its authority, as parole is a function of the executive branch, not an element of sentencing,” Griffen wrote.

Upcoming Events