The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania

Home , Dick Thornburgh, Kathleen Kane, Milton Shapp, Tom Corbett, Tom Ridge

State Clemency Project

★ The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania Pennsylvania law automatically imposes life imprisonment for first- and second-degree murder, including felony murder, which requires no intent to kill. It is also one of only five states that categorically excludes lifers from parole consideration; the only way for a lifer to be released is by clemency. For a time, the State’s harsh sentencing policies were tempered by a practice of commuting several dozen life sentences each year. That changed around 1980, when commutations in Pennsylvania fell off dramatically. With few exceptions, clemency in the Keystone State remains in a state of a disuse.

Commutation, a form of executive clemency,1 is the act of violent crimes, which evoked nightmares of Willie Horton shortening a custodial sentence imposed by a court. This from the 1988 presidential election. McFadden would be report examines the historical and structural reasons for viewed as evidence that supporting clemency could exact clemency’s decline in Pennsylvania. Like many other states, grave political costs. As one former Pennsylvania Attorney Pennsylvania has a Board of Pardons that vets clemency General admitted, “[n]obody wants to have that against them petitions and submits recommendations to the Governor, in their political careers.”2 who makes the final decision. The Board thus acts as “gatekeeper;” its approval is necessary but not sufficient for Pennsylvania’s clemency system is hampered by the Board’s clemency to be granted. institutional design. In 1997, following the McFadden deba- cle, legislators amended the state constitution to require Two political events set the stage for clemency’s demise in that lifers seeking commutation receive unanimous Board Pennsylvania. First was the 1979 election of Governor Dick approval. This requirement has thwarted many petitioners Thornburgh, who personified a broader shift toward retributive who would have been approved by the Board for commuta- justice that swept the nation in the 1980s. Under Thornburgh, tion under the pre-1997 rules. A second problem relates to the annual number of sentence commutations granted to lifers the Board’s composition. Among the five-member Board are fell from roughly 30 to near zero. Commutations rebounded the publically-elected Attorney General and the Lieutenant modestly in the early 1990s, until a former lifer named Governor, whose presence undermines the political insula- Reginald McFadden committed a spate of highly publicized tion normally associated with pardon boards. Haunted by

1 Other forms of executive clemency, which are beyond the scope of this paper, include pardons, reprieves, and remission of fines. See Pa. Const. Art. 4, § 9. 2 See Cary, infra note 4.

- - - - 3

) The 4 http://commmedia.psu. The Board of Pardons 5 37 Pa. Code § 81.304. See . , COMMmedia News (Dec. 3, 2014) 2014) 3, (Dec. , COMMmedia News The [No] Mercy Rule: Clemency and the Pennsylvania state and the Clemency Rule: Mercy The [No] Senate to six-year terms. Senate six-year to 5 Documents district containing input from and trial judges attorneys the petitioner’s and his or her disciplinary background record the Attorney General.the Attorney The three unelected Board members screened is by Board the completion Pardons for of to ted the Secretary the sentencing of the Board, to then circulated The judge and prosecutortion took place. whether indicate clemency for the petitioner. they favor of Pardons conducts a public merit review to determine conducts determine of Pardons to review a public merit expert, a medical professional, the Lieutenant Governor, andexpert, a medical professional, Governor, the Lieutenant cases except impeachment. pass Before the Governor may majorityon an application, a the five-member of of Board must vote the Board’s constitutional amendment, however, 3 Pa. Const. Art. 4, § 9. edu/news/story/mercy-rule-clemency-and-the-pennsylvania-state- are nominated by the Governorby the nominated by and confirmedstate are authority to grant pardons and commute sentences commute and grant pardons authority to in all in Pennsylvania judge and district the prosecu in the county where attorney be unanimous in order to recommend clemency for a lifer. berecommend clemency to for a lifer. unanimous in order are not publically available. available. not publically are people sentenced life imprisonment to death, or to a major ity vote is required in order to grant a full public hearing.public full a grant to order requiredin is vote ity relies Board on the Parole conduct into to an investigation istrative model of clemency, in which a Boarda which in Pardons of model clemency, of istrative makes the Governor. to a non-binding recommendation constitution Procedures for Granting Clemency Clemency for Granting Procedures constitution For all other cases, required. are votes For two Like the President in the federal system, the Governor has Pursuant a 1997 to of clemency. in favor mustPardons vote no otherrequires state unanimous Boarda Pennsylvania, while incarcerated. a full public hearing. For whether the application warrants (Of the nine states that use the same “gatekeeper” model as The Pennsylvania Constitution establishes admin mixed a Pennsylvania The vote to send to the Governor. forward an application to vote victim.other The positionsfour occupied are a correctionsby 1997 Amendment also Amendment a place on the Board created for a crime1997 4 Lee Cary, 4 Lee Cary, After assemblingAfter all necessary information, the Board As each application submit page, illustrated on the following 1. - - 2 2018 2017 5,461 64 Maine 175 South Dakota Lifer Population

760 Iowa n

1,609 Illinois 5,346 Life Sentences Commuted Life Sentences

Pennsylvania Pennsylvania n granting only two commutations since assuming office in two granting only the possibilitythe these another of Reggie McFadden, officials opponents years. of commutation in recent of violent crimes. are often unwilling to accept the political risks of voting to to accept political the voting of to risks unwilling often are Figure 2: Lifer population in states with no parole for lifers with no parole in states 2: Lifer population Figure Figure 1: Life Sentences / Lifer Population (1967-2018) / Lifer Population 1: Life Sentences Figure revitalize clemency will depend in part col on their ability to nificant clemency reform. Fetterman recently appointed Fetterman a nificant clemencyreform. recommend clemency, particularly for individuals convicted particularly individuals for clemency, recommend Governor John Fetterman seems sig achieving on intent Fetterman Governor John laborate become with local prosecutors, outspoken who have formerly incarcerated person, incarcerated formerly Brandon Flood, serve to as the State Clemency Project Clemency State Board’s secretary. Whether Flood and Fetterman successfully Flood Whether Fetterman and secretary. Board’s December 2018 and March 2019. Newly elected Lieutenant Newly December 2019. 2018 and March 2015, Governor Wolf granted four commutations between granted 2015, Governor Wolf There are, however, reasons optimism. for cautious After however, are, There 1967 449 25

The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 2 The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 3 - -

a Community the first year at the first Favorable Board Board Favorable for final decision. Final Decision Board of Parole of Board Corrections Center. Center. Corrections Governor Makes Makes Governor sent to the Governor the Governor sent to are normally released released normally are recommendations are are recommendations Successful petitioners Successful petitioners on parole. They spend They on parole.

- Board Vote Board regular majority. regular to move forward. forward. move to

Non-lifers need a Non-lifers

Lifers must receive receive must Lifers Public Hearing/Public

unanimous (5-0) vote vote unanimous (5-0) this rule makesrule this Board members public;the to accountable in order of commutation date the from years two tion date participationfor allow pre-releasea in to firstprogram. The on the other, it threatens to politicize to it threatens the Board subject by on the other, under the jurisdiction of the Parole Board indefinitely. under the jurisdiction Board of the Parole indefinitely. ing members based public criticism votes. to on individual Board member on a particular voted On one hand, application. The individual is then released on parole and usually remains released is then usually and parole individual on The votes are no longer anonymous; the public can see each longer no how anonymous; votes are spent is normally in a Community year Corrections Center. When a petitiona When successful,is Governorthe sets expira an and Victims/Family Members and Victims/Family Review offenders. offenders. Input from District Attorney, Judge, Judge, District Attorney, Input from Public MeritPublic Does application hearing? 3 of 5 must warrant a full public warrant offenders.” Two votes Two offenders.” are required for other required are vote “yes”vote for “violent Procedures for Granting Clemency in Pennsylvania Clemency for Granting Procedures Petition available at the correctional facility? at the correctional available What is the impact on the victim(s) of the offense(s)? Victims or to appear opportunity at of kin must be notified and given next submission. confidential written hearing or make Has an appropriate period of incarceration been served based on the been served period of incarceration Has an appropriate of the offense? circumstances for conduct record Has the applicant maintained an appropriate of clemency? consideration him availed and/or Has the applicant had a successful work record self-improvement opportunities for of the programming self/herself Does the applicant have appeals Does pending in court? the applicant have be within a or will he/she for parole Is the applicant eligible time? reasonable 6. 3. 4. 5. Factors Considered by the Board* by Considered Factors 1. 2. to the Governor, who then grants who then or denies the application. the Governor, to explanation and triggers a one- period or two-year waiting clemency, such as the victim’s family. The Board The then votes. family. such as the victim’s clemency, clemency application. At the hearing,clemency application. At 15 minutes allotted is before a subsequent application may start the process anew. before start a subsequent the process may application anew. requirement to the state legislature. As of 1991, however, Board however, As 1991, of legislature. state the to requirement for presentation by the applicant and by anyone opposing for presentation anyone and by the applicant by Unlike in mostin Unlike states, Board the reportingformal no has Transparency in Pennsylvania’s clemency process is mixed. Transparency in Pennsylvania’s A favorable vote causes vote be recommendation to a written sent A favorable ends the process vote without formal written An unfavorable A public hearing may occur up to three years after filing of theof filing after years occur three to up hearing may public A * https://www.bop.pa.gov/application-process/Pages/Factors-Considered-by-the-Board.aspx

------

, specifically the Board’s unanimous unanimous specifically the Board’s third person in New York. Media cover personthird York. in New constitution— tated changes the State’s to commuted in 1992 by Governor by Robert commuted in 1992 peakedwhich of violent crime, the in crimes precipi McFadden’s 1990s. early ency virtuallyunobtainable lifers.for age of McFadden, “Pennsylvania’s Willie “Pennsylvania’s age of McFadden, natorial electionnatorial stoking public fears by Casey, murdered two people two murdered and raped a Casey, Horton,” likely influenced the 1994 guber 1994 influenced the likely Horton,” McFadden, whoseMcFadden, sentence beenhad when a former lifer named Reginald named lifer Reginald former a when voting requirement—that made clem requirement—that voting A second downturn occurred in 1994, secondA occurred downturn 1994, in Because all lifers are ineligible for parole in for parole ineligible are all lifers Because 7 : Dick Thornburgh: http://paterno.com/Expert-Bios/Dick-Thorn and 1980s. Meanwhile, it saw a disproportionate it saw a disproportionate and 1980s. Meanwhile, states. individuals is commutation. Yet, in the 1980s andindividuals is commutation. Yet, increase in its prison population beginning in the 1970s in the 1970s in its prison population beginning increase in prison without the serving life in people increase for relief became more urgent, executive clemency executive urgent, became more for relief possibility of parole. The lifer population grew from from The lifer population grew possibility of parole. of Pennsylvania’s 10 percent now account for roughly country. the in rate highest the population, prison life serving people more were that there reported was brought to virtual standstill. to was brought the increase. The Abolitionist Law Center recently recently Center Abolitionist Law The the increase. four but all than (2,694) Philadelphia in parole without Like other states, Pennsylvania sustained a dramatic sustained Pennsylvania other states, Like to disproportionately Philadelphia has contributed hope for these provide to way the only Pennsylvania, PA’s Exploding Lifer Population Exploding PA’s 449 in 1967, to 2275 in 1991, to 5346 in 2017. Lifers Lifers 2017. in 5346 to 1991, in 2275 to 1967, in 449 1990s, as the lifer population increased and the need 1990s, as the lifer population increased A Way Out: Abolishing Death by Incarceration in Pennsylvania Death by Incarceration Out: Abolishing A Way Dick Thornburgh McFadden Reginald 7 Only ten have been since. commuted have ten Only Photos https://www.lohud. McFadden: Reginald burgh.aspx#.XKYqCZhKjct; com/story/news/crime/2015/02/03/reginald-mcfadden-multiple-mur ders-rape-rockland-crime-scene/22798247/

Between 1967 and 1994, over 360 life sentences were commuted. 360 life sentences were over and 1994, Between 1967 Abolitionist Law Center, 29 (2018) Center, Abolitionist Law

- - -

Figure 3. The first occurred in 1979, when The first 1979, 3. Figure occurred in See In the following 35 years, only 380 commuted only 35 years, In the following 6

sentences granted by predecessor Milton Shapp. Thornburgh’s sentences Thornburgh’s predecessor by granted Shapp. Milton justice at the expense retributive of rehabilitation. shift toward the total number total the personsof (lifers non-lifers) and post-paroled tion. The Board reviewed prison BoardThe tion. disciplinary reviewed and records tion that individuals are capable of rehabilitation. Because capable of rehabilitation. are tion that individuals clemency. Thornburgh commuted just seven lifers during his clemency. to the compared 251 commutations of life in office, eight years ethos spoke of his time and often about publically restricting commutation. As many as 70 or more incarcerated persons incarcerated or more as 70 commutation. As many commutation. of steep decline. Annual reportsof steep decline. issued the Department by of change. If a personchange. demonstrated evidence of rehabilitation ency has been for generations lifeline the only of individuals and could point post-release a coherent to plan, the Board in Pennsylvania in Pennsylvania political events. person a second chance at freedom. there were years in which not a single commutation was granted. not a single commutation was years in which were there routinely granted clemency after 10 to 20 years of incarcera 20 years to 10 granted clemency after routinely reports corrections to identify evidence of by officials positive incarcerated there. Throughout the 20th century, lifers were lifers were the 20th century, Throughout there. incarcerated Corrections show that in the 35-year period andCorrections that in the 35-year between show 1932 hardline approach to crime-control to approach hardline belonged a broader to lifers were released on parole, a vast majority (345) a vast releasedlifers on parole, were between lifers are ineligible for parole in Pennsylvania, executive clem executive Pennsylvania, in parole for ineligible lifers are 2004), available at https://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/yount/. 2004), available 6 Jon E. Yount, Pennsylvania: Parole and Life Imprisonment, 30 (Feb. and Life Imprisonment, Parole 30 (Feb. Pennsylvania: E.6 Jon Yount, State Clemency Project Clemency State Ronald Reagan, Thornburgh personifiedThornburgh Reagan, Ronald ‘tough-on-crime’ the Pennsylvania elected Dick Thornburgh as its 41st Governor. elected Dick Thornburgh as its 41st Pennsylvania Governor. Historically, the Board of Pardons was guided a presump by the Board was of Pardons Historically, were paroled following commutation each year during the each commutation year following paroled were was often willing to recommend that the Governor offer that willing to often was The rate of decline in sentence commutations tracks two key decline of in sentence rate two The tracks commutations This all changed around 1980, when clemency entered a perioda clemencywhen entered changedall This 1980, around 1960s; by Governor Ridge’s administration in the late 1990s, 1990s, administration the late in Governor by Ridge’s 1960s; 1967 and 1979. The same is true with respect general trend to and 1979. 1967 1967, 607 lifers were released sentence following 607 lifers on parole were 1967, Attorney General under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bush GeneralAttorney under Presidents George H.W. A former federal prosecutor became States who later United

The Demise of Clemency for Lifers for Lifers The Demise of Clemency 2.

The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 4 The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 5

- - - - - 8 -

, 3 (March 1988). , 3 (March , 32 (Feb. 12, 1985). , 32 (Feb. A Strategy to Alleviate , The Morning Call, Aug. 11,, The Morning Call, Aug. 1985.

9 Rather than attempt to reduce prison than attempt to Rather popu 10 Few Criminals Get Few Thornburgh Commutation Under of the total prison population accounts and now for ency for these individuals. approximately 10 percent of the population…therefore percent 10 of the population…therefore approximately beby increasing the use reduced significantly of clem population has been larger an increasingly portion in the DOC sentenced life imprisonment. to This lifer it could be assumed that the DOC’s population could The useThe particularly affect of clemency would inmates

standards in reviewing pardon and commutation requests,” and commutation requests,” pardon standards in reviewing 8 Rod Snyder, of the End of Clemency for Lifers for Lifers End of Clemency of the to unprecedented levels. The impact was immediately appar immediately The impact unprecedented was levels. to granted clemency in just seven of 75 favorable Board recom favorable granted clemency in just of 75 seven ent to corrections officials. A 1985 Report 1985 correctionsent to of the Pennsylvania officials. A observations about lifer population growing the and its effect on overcrowding: overcrowding. constructed prisons more and leveraged public anxiety about as a “former U.S. attorney and law-and-order champion,” and law-and-order attorney as a “former U.S. in Pennsylvania in Pennsylvania presented to threat undue an than clemency more little as excerpt comes a reelection The following from public safety. particularly for lifers. Governor Shapp com Whereas Milton noted that 10 statesnoted 10 prison that reported mitigate clemency using to He justifyrising crime to a major reduction in clemency. muted 251 him sentencesmuted life to recommended 264 the of out mendations. The success for all clemency petitioners rate Commission on Crime and Delinquency made the following lations by means lations by of commutation or otherwise, Thornburgh lent crime. He prioritizedlent crime. the establishment new of “tough 9 Prison and Jail Overcrowding Task Force, Task Overcrowding 9 Prison and Jail Dick Thornburgh: The Beginning Beginning The Dick Thornburgh: for clemency by the Board from 1971 to 1978, Thornburgh Thornburgh 1978, to for clemency the Board by 1971 from 10 The National Governors’ Association Governors’ 10 The National Center for Policy Research, 8.2% in 1978 to 0.1% in 1981. 0.1% to in 1978 8.2% Elected in 1979, Governor Dick Thornburgh brought an end to end an brought Thornburgh Governor Dick Elected 1979, in robust clemency campaigned process. Having Pennsylvania’s During Thornburgh’s tenure, the population lifers of surged tenure, During Thornburgh’s Overcrowding in Pennsylvania’s Prisons and Jails Overcrowding in Pennsylvania’s States American the Clemency Among Guide to Executive Focus on PrisonFocus Sentences (accounting for both and commutations) fell from pardons Thornburgh personifiedReagan-era the crusade against vio A 1988 Publication of the National Institute of Corrections Publication Institute A 1988 of the National 3 1 2 8 0 2018 1996 2008

1994 MURDERS MCFADDEN MCFADDEN 1987 Recommended by Board by Recommended

THORNBURGH THORNBURGH 1979 ADMINISTRATION

Petitions Heard Petitions Board Commutedby Life Sentences

65 1967 25 n n Figure 5:Figure Commuted Life Sentences Figure 4: All Individuals Paroled After 4: Commutation Figure All Individuals Paroled Figure 3: Commutations of Life Sentences in PA (1967-2018) in PA Sentences Commutations of Life 3: Figure 25 99 1967 1967

- WOLFF (2015-2018) WOLFF 1.0

Ridge (0/15)

CORBETT (2011-2014) CORBETT

0.0 RENDELL (2004-2011) RENDELL 0.6

23%

Casey (27/118) SCHWEIKER (2002-2003) SCHWEIKER 0.5

RIDGE (1995-2001) RIDGE 0.0 9% (7/74)

Thornburgh CASEY (1987-1994) CASEY (April 2, 1984) 3.4

THORNBURGH (1979-1986) (1979-1986) THORNBURGH 91%

Shapp 0.9

(193/213) SHAPP (1971-1978) SHAPP 30.1

SHAFER (1967-1970) SHAFER 100% Shafer (94/94) 23.3 stitute 99% of those serving life sentences—judicial expertise this charging decision. Thornburgh’s notion the “judge that this charging decision. Thornburgh’s ignores the reality of sentence” the appropriate determine to or second-degree murder, and the District Attorney controls controls and the Districtor second-degree Attorney murder, con of first or second degree in Pennsylvania—who murder statement when he went in there in there he went when statement Charles Miller Miller Charles Commuted by Governor Governor by Commuted Philadelphia Inquirer Philadelphia plays no role in the sentencing no role outcome. plays Figure 7: Success of Petitioners Recommended by Board by Recommended 7:Figure Success of Petitioners Figure 6: Average Annual Number Life Sentences Annual Number 6:Average Figure Pennsylvania’s sentencing anybody convicted statutes. For Pennsylvania’s So there ain’t no use in bothering no use So ain’t there that ain’t nobody going out. ain’t that man about that.” the who passes a sentence on a criminal is in the best position “Thornburgh made the made the “Thornburgh -

11 Figure 7. In contrast,In 7. Figure

12 See note 8, at 1. note 8, supra these views, it should come as no surprise that the tough, new, minimum, mandatory sentencing law for minimum, mandatory sentencing law new, tough, during the Shapp administration. extraordinary circumstances to prevent an injustice… extraordinary circumstances prevent to dealing with violent criminals, who prey on innocentdealing criminals, who prey with violent and major expansions underway in the commonwealth and major expansions underway judge who passes a sentence on a criminal is in the best position to determine the appropriate sentence. Given Given sentence. appropriate position the determine to prison system. We are determined to put fear to work work fearput to to determined are prisonWe system. people on our streets and in our homes. Today we have have we people streets our on homes. in our and Today numbers of commutations and pardons approved by numbers approved of commutations and pardons been substantially below the numberme have granted my office on the granting of pardons and clemency the granting of pardons office on my for the law abiding citizens abiding not criminals. and the for law the for Pardons and commutations should bePardons issued in only They are not They are good-conduct medals. I also believe that a violent offenders. Tough, new imposedTough, standards violent offenders.by We in Pennsylvania are paralyzed are indecision by in in Pennsylvania We shift from rehabilitative to retributive justicethat occurred retributive to rehabilitative shift from standards for commutation. Before a lifer who Thornburgh, tions properly if the Governorthe if properly tions Boardthe and collaborate; the Governor in almost of cases. 100% defined, suffice it to say he to took approach a defined, to more” suffice it “less is disagreement of between Thornburgh rate high The clemency. campaign speech Thornburgh delivered to the Pennsylvania the Pennsylvania speechcampaign to delivered Thornburgh automatically triggeredautomatically when someone of first- is convicted around 1980. According to Thornburgh: to According 1980. around and informed decision-making. and his Board suggests coherent develop that he failed to by rejecting more than 9 of 10 favorable recommendations, rejectingby favorable than 9 of 10 more relates to life sentences. In Pennsylvania, a life sentence is life sentences. to relates In Pennsylvania, model of clemency employed in Pennsylvania only func only Pennsylvania in model clemency of employed recommended the Board. for clemency by The gatekeeping (July 8, 1982). 8, (July 11 Speech to Pennsylvania Rural Electric11 Rural Association, Speech Pennsylvania to Champion, PA 12 Snyder State Clemency Project Clemency State Rural ElectricRural Association of 1982: in July was favorably recommended by the Board was commuted by commuted Board the was by recommended favorably was Thornburgh’s explanation rings hollow, at least insofar as it explanation rings hollow, Thornburgh’s Thornburgh’s opposition clemency reflected to general a more Thornburgh’s Thornburgh undermined the structure’s capacity for efficient capacity Thornburgh undermined the structure’s Thornburgh granted commutations to a mere 9% of the lifers a mere Thornburgh granted commutations to Thornburgh’s “tough, new standards” were never concretely concretely never were new standards” “tough, Thornburgh’s

The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 6 The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 7 ------

His approval rating ahead His approval 15 sion to releasesion to Horton. A political action committee called statewide crime during the first three years crime during the firststatewide of his adminis three this moment as a turning point in Bush’s election campaign. this moment as a turning point in Bush’s the criminal justice system, essential but understand to attack Dukakis Horton to the publicity surrounding as soft the words by turing a grim mug shotof Horton, followed to crime, flawed as it was. Following a 14-percent drop in in drop 14-percent a Following was. it as flawed crime, to Prevention Crime the National received tration, Thornburgh States presented Attorney United him by to tion program,” crime-stopper a as tion appointment his led to Attorney as under Thornburgh, commutations rosetously modestly under emblematic of the fear-mongering of race and exploitation crime in American politics. commentators flagged Many ency structurebest is understoodHorton analogy Willie by to serving Horton was crime. a life sentence in for murder of Massachusetts furloughed. when Horton Bush used was in the deci though Dukakis not involved even was on crime, of the 1982 reelection stood at 65%. Thornburgh’s reputa reelection stoodof the 1982 Thornburgh’s at 65%. nia (June 29, 1984). 29, nia (June and Michael Dukakis. attacking her fiance. after perspective of the sitting Governor. After declining After precipi perspective of the sitting Governor. ing the relationship betweening the relationship media, identity politics, and midst the in of a 1988, in and return, failed He to 1986. in Governor Bob Casey. Then, in 1994, the crime spree of Reginald the crime spree Then, in 1994, Governor Bob Casey. Coalition’s State Award for “outstanding state crime preven for “outstanding Award State Coalition’s General Smith. French William GeneralStates under Presidents of the United and Reagan Bush. George H.W. heated presidential race, Horton viciously raped Hortonheated viciously presidential race, a woman Reginald McFadden and the McFadden Reginald 15 Press Governor’s Release, of Pennsylva Press Commonwealth Office, Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis had been Governor McFadden completely derailed the State’s clemency system. derailed the State’s completely McFadden Massachusetts released furlough when he was on weekend The long-term impact of McFadden on Pennsylvania’s clem impact on Pennsylvania’s The long-term of McFadden those storyThe to Horton Willie of studywho is well-known Thornburgh was rewarded politically for his “tough” approach politically for his “tough” rewarded was Thornburgh of clemency depends on the unique largely The availability Americans for Bush ran an inflammatorytelevision ad fea “kidnapping,” “stabbing,” and “raping.” The ad has become and “raping.” “stabbing,” “kidnapping,” “Willie Effect” Horton

- - - 4 2017 , The Figure 8, and 8, Figure see

13 Imprisoned until death—PA. lifers lose hopes for until death—PA. Imprisoned Pennsylvania Shapes Prison Law to Cut Crime Figure 5. An April 1984 article published 5. An April 1984 by Figure See was not merely trying to curtail executive clemency— trying curtail not to merely executive was 14 , Philadelphia Inquirer, A1, Apr. 2, 1984. 2, 1984. A1, Apr. , Philadelphia Inquirer, suggested that Governor Shapp “may have gone overboard, gone overboard, have suggested that Governor Shapp “may sit on the governor’s desk,” she told one newspaper. Damick one newspaper. she told sit on the governor’s desk,” the numberCorrections of of Bureau responsible employees the number for commutations during the of applications the Philadelphia Inquirer documentedthe Philadelphia Inquirer a marked decline in dations between 1980 and 1985 dropped from 35% to 19%. dropped 35% 19%. from to and 1985 dations between 1980 early years of Thornburgh’s administration. Even as the lifer administration. Even of Thornburgh’s early years clemency. clemency. pennsylvania-shapes-prison-law-to-cut-crime.html. advisory the Board applications to committee of Pardons, but on the other side Governor Thornburgh has gone over proposed had who Thornburgh, eliminating board [too].” parole, population increased, number the of applications resulting Figure 8: Lifers Receiving Public Hearings Public Receiving 8:Figure Lifers New York Times, July 8, 1982, https://www.nytimes.com/1982/07/08/us/ 1982, 8, Times, July York New reduced from three to one. to reduced three from in formal hearingsdecrease, continued to ing effecting on the number of persons prison in for applying he was tryinghe was get to rid of it. parole favorably recommended by the Board recommended languished by for often favorably for representing persons in prison Board at hearings was 14 Wendell Rawls, Jr., Jr., Rawls, Wendell 14 13 John Woestendiek, Woestendiek, 13 John 99 1967 The Board itself also became stringent more Thornburgh. under recommen favorable The percentage of lifers who received Thornburgh’s antagonism toward clemency had a chill antagonism toward Thornburgh’s years on the Governor’syears desk. “[T]he recommendations just According to Marion Damick, to According chairperson of the citizens’ - -

all honesty, say that today. that today. say all honesty, that the pardons and commutation process isthat the pardons and commutation standards. I cannot, in tempered by exacting is matched by our caution, and our mercy is amending the constitution. stitution. By letter dated Friday, Oct. 14, 1994, Friday, dated I have stitution. By letter proposed each member of the Board to submitted what we have said it is: That our compassion what we have said it is: That of course, only a majority vote is required to send asend to required is vote majority a only course, of that announce to this meeting following conference death penalty, unless all five members of this Board Board of this members all five unless death penalty, go before the voters next year. That is none too soon. That is none too year. next the voters before go unanimously recommended that he do so. Currently, Currently, that he do so. recommended unanimously language to amend Article IV, Section 9, of the State IV, Article amend to language for this Board to endorse a change in the State Con in the State a change endorse to for this Board process, to determine what can be done to lessen lessen what can be done to determine to process, recommendation to the Governor… the Governor… to recommendation of the process begin to legislation he is introducing be able to pardon or commute a life sentence, or a a life sentence, or commute pardon to be able Under this amendment, not would Governor the October 20, 1994 20, October the likelihood of a recurrence. of a the likelihood Constitution. Statement of Attorney General Attorney of Statement [T]he McFadden case obliges us to reevaluate the reevaluate us to [T]he case obliges McFadden Ernie Preate Jr., Board of Pardons, of Pardons, Board Jr., Ernie Preate In fact, me at a news Mark Fisher will join Senator I have publicly suggested and now do officially call and now do officially suggested publicly I have With prompt legislative action, this measure could action, this measure legislative With prompt We have to reassure the people of Pennsylvania We tial time bomb” for Singel and Preate, who were both who were viewed for Singel and Preate, tial time bomb” as ascendantas political figures. of the the time By McFadden One prescient 1991 newspaperOne prescient poten article called 1991 the Board “a McFadden’s Impact on the McFadden’s fallout, Preate’s bid for Governor had been spoiled federal by fallout, Preate’s Republican candidate. candidate. Republican wire fraud charges, and Tom Ridge emerged as the leading fraud charges,wire and Tom 1994 Gubernatorial Election 1994 Gubernatorial -

16 Accused Serial Killer and 92 Days 92 and Serial Killer Accused Second, McFadden’s crimes Second, McFadden’s 17 Board can give new lease on life member of the five-member of Board ex officio , Apr. 4, 1995. , Apr. Singel for being soft on crime. tion in favor of Republican Tom Ridge. Like Bush did with did Bush Like Ridge. Tom Republican of favor in tion the summer of 1994, the 42-year-old McFadden traveled to to traveled 42-year-old the McFadden the summer of 1994, toward sensational acts formerly toward violence committed by of of a life sentence, are discussed in more detail below. discussed are of a life sentence, detail below. in more difficult. Thesedifficult. changes, the that requirement the including clemency First, system. polling suggest records that McFadden crime provoked a fevered backlash against Pennsylvania’s against backlash Pennsylvania’s a fevered crime provoked application by a vote of 4-1, with Preate as the only dissenter as the only with Preate of 4-1, a vote application by the with voting Markand Governor, Singel, Lieutenant then as a juvenile, Reginald McFadden received a commutation received McFadden Reginald as a juvenile, use of executive clemency. clemency. use of executive bad apple. No matter how many individuals successfully individuals many how matter No bad apple. precipitated structural changes to Pennsylvania’s clemency precipitated structural changes Pennsylvania’s to processsentenceslife commuting made that extraordinarily paroled lifers since 1930 to commit first-degree murder, his commit first-degree to murder, paroled lifers since 1930 may have affected the outcome of the 1994 gubernatorial elec 1994 affected of the the outcome have may majority. Although McFadden was only the second only was of 900 Although McFadden majority. incarcerated persons, however rare. rare. persons,incarcerated however reenter society, the media is bound to divert public attention public the media bound is divert to society, reenter kidnapped a third. The Board had approved McFadden’s kidnapped McFadden’s The Board a third. had approved life sentence in Pennsylvania for a homicide he committed for a homicide life sentence in Pennsylvania have received clemency in Pennsylvania. He had only served He had only clemency in Pennsylvania. received have from Governor Bob Casey in 1992. Following his release in Governor Following from Bob Casey in 1992. furlough program was Pennsylvania Attorney General Attorney Ernie Pennsylvania was furlough program 17 Joseph Berger, The New York Times, York The New 17 Joseph Berger, 16 Tim Reeves, The Morning Tim Reeves, Call,16 of Freedom State Clemency Project Clemency State Board vote unanimously before commutation recommending unanimously Board vote New York, where he murdered two people raped two and murdered he and where York, New Preate was soon proven wrong. After serving After soon wrong. was Preate 25 of a proven years Pardons. Along with criticizing Massachusetts’ Along with Pardons. handling of local one told Horton,newspaper: would Preate “Horton never Preate, an Preate, was that early-release policieswas not of one worth the risk are The episode had two major repercussions for Pennsylvania’s The episode major repercussions for Pennsylvania’s had two The lesson downfall that politicians learned Dukakis’s from voters’ fears aboutvoters’ public safety attack opponent and to Mark Apr. 21, 1991. Apr. 10 or 12 years. It was a revolving door up there.” a revolving or 12 It was 10 years. Willie Horton, Ridge used episode the McFadden exploit to Among those public disdain who voiced Massachusetts for the

The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 8 The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 9

- - 21

In other 20

arrested for rape and murder… and for rape arrested The Ridge. Tom choice. a better convicted murderer. The man murderer. convicted again?...There’s him ever trust substituting a crime victim member or family in for a member membersseveral Board—the the Governor of and Lieutenant told by Ernie Preate, who championed the 1997 amendment, who championed the 1997 Ernie Preate, by told otherwise consider supporting petitions for clemency. As otherwise supporting consider petitions clemency. for of the bar. Certainly is nothing with including there wrong of the bar. offices whoare often occupied by individuals seek higher very the or at leastoffice, reelection.seek The pub potential under the old rules, the application would have been held in abeyance have under the old rules, the application would until the fifth membervote for or against could cast the deciding a non-unanimous majority of votes, which would have caused have would which votes, majorityof non-unanimous a rules. recommendation under the old a favorable a balance of maintain a victim on the Board.advocate To bias against petitioners. interests, however, a seata alsoshould be reserved interests,someonefor however, however, politicalnors from In Pennsylvania, recriminations. recommend clemency. Of the other 15 petitioners, 8 received recommend clemency. were denied commutation by a vote of 3-2. a vote denied commutation by were One advantage of clemency gover boards is that they insulate One advantage (www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline) (www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline) have been recommended instead for commutation, of just 11. have or McFadden a Reginald created by nightmare lic-relations commutation. 20 An additional application received a 2-2 vote; it is likely that it is likely vote; a 2-2 20 An additional application received Robert Swartworth and Craig Datesman in 2017, 21 Most recently, Board Composition and Politics Composition and Politics Board too liberal on crime…How can we can on crime…How too liberal judgment and character we trust. we and character judgment words, under the pre-1997 rules, 19 of the 25 the of applicants rules, would 19 pre-1997 the under words, who represents persons.incarcerated of the voice Adding one institutionalwithout the other compounded likely the Board’s The amendment also changed the Board’s compositionThe amendment also changed by the Board’s TV Ad Run by Ridge Campaign Ridge TV by Ad Run Willie Horton is a powerful deterrent for officials who mightfor officials deterrent HortonWillie a powerful is Attorney General—are themselves Attorney directly elected. These Mark Singel votes to free a free to votes Singel Mark is release to voted Singel Mark judgment… Singel…bad Mark

------19 - -

On October 6, police in New York York police OctoberOn New in 6, 18 sight leading up to McFadden’s release. Standard practice release. Standard had sight leading McFadden’s up to sored by state senator (and current federal judge) Mike Fisher, sored state senator federal by (and current judge) Mike Fisher, Singel with a seven-point lead over Ridge (38%Singel seven-point a with lead over Singel for spread. The Pittsburghspread. Post-Gazette regis 699 surveyed Singel lead held a commanding race for Governor in the tion. McFadden, however, was inexplicably released inexplicably was directly however, tion. McFadden, proce voting the Board’s the streets.to than overhaul Rather tions for lifers would becometions for lifers would virtually oppo unobtainable, to 40%. He did not commute a single life sentence as Governor. a single life sentence He did not 40%. as Governor. commute to tered voters between voters Octobertered 3 and October and found 6 through the summer of 1994, but his advantage in statewide his advantage but summer of 1994, the through on the ability of lifers to seek clemency in Pennsylvania. seekon the ability of lifers to clemency in Pennsylvania. dures, a more measured response would have implemented dures, measured a more response have would not that commuted lifers skip thischecks ensure would to crucial stage of reentry. eo/?60882-1/campaign-almanac&start=3364. eo/?61378-1/campaign-almanac. a Communitya reintegra Corrections facilitate to Center (CCC) approved by the General Assembly, and then ratified by ratifiedby and then General the by approved Assembly, arrested McFadden for rape.arrested McFadden but the effort failed. public referendum. Predicting that commuta public referendum. (correctly) polls rapidly disintegrated as news of McFadden’s crimes polls of McFadden’s as news disintegrated rapidly Constitutional Amendment nents of the amendment sued enjoin to its implementation, recommending a lifer for commutation. The bill was spon commutation. The bill was a lifer for recommending in 1997 to require that the Board vote unanimously before unanimously that the Board require vote to in 1997 rage in Pennsylvania and across the country, the Greensburg the across and country, the rage in Pennsylvania Out of 26 lifers granted full hearings by the Board since 1998, Out of 26 lifers granted full hearingsBoard the by since 1998, long been for commuted lifers to spend “one or two years” in years” or two long been lifers spend for commuted to “one Pennsylvania’s 1997 1997 Pennsylvania’s 19 C-Span, 31:10, November 7, 1994, https://www.c-span.org/vid 1994, 7, November C-Span, 31:10, 19 18 C-Span, 13:50, October 16, 1994, https://www.c-span.org/vid 1994, October 16, 18 C-Span, 13:50, 36% for Singel). That poll was released on November 7, 1994. for Singel). 7, That poll released36% was on November Ridge won the governorship the next day by a margin of 45% by the next day the governorship Ridge won Ridge with a one-point Singel (37% lead over for Ridge versus Meanwhile, legislatorsMeanwhile, failed address to over a bureaucratic Tribune-Review surveyed 367 registered voters and found registered voters Tribune-Review 367 surveyed versus 31% for Ridge).for 31% versus 11 received the unanimous vote required for the Board required to the unanimous vote 11 received As expected, impact amendment had a profound the 1997 Article 9 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution amendedState was ArticlePennsylvania the of 9 A few weeks later, as news of McFadden’s crimes stoked out of McFadden’s as news later, A few weeks

------25 - , available at , available From a sample favor of 228 From 26 , 50 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 338, , 50 J. It is apparent, however, that however, It is apparent, 24 Murder, The Pardon Board, and Recommenda Board, The Pardon Murder, and another in March of 2019. Having secured Having and another in March of 2019. 27 sample that included all sentence (not commutations limited https://www.justice.gov/pardon/about-office-0. to oppose clemency. opposeto clemency. But prosecutorial 70%. supporttions, or roughly for clemency to homicide cases), 63 percent of favorable Board recommen homicide cases),to percent 63 of favorable and 1970s. 1960s the tinued into today than in previous decades. than in previous examined One study the opin today ecutor either advocated for clemency expresslyecutor either advocated or declined supported successful of 89 clemency 62 or passively applica offered their supportrecord. on reasons are there for optimism. clemency system. Fortunately, erally do not promulgate guidelinesnot do for prosecutor promulgate erally testi supporteddations were or unopposed district by attorneys. convicted of firstconvicted and secondreceived degree who murder 342-43 (1959). for distribution of cocaine and marijuana. able recommendations received by lifers between 1967 and lifers between by 1967 able recommendations received in Pennsylvania in Pennsylvania petitions declined over time. Beginning in the late 1970s, sup Beginningpetitions time. declined 1970s, in the late over prosecutors rarely port prosecutors from 1990, after waned; tions by Judges and District Attorneys tions by Judges mony at clemency hearings.mony ions of district and trial judges attorneys for 368 petitioners not oppose” clemency in 57 percent cases. of the In a three-year Governor Wolf, who commuted two sentencescommutedtwo who his during Governor Wolf, 53.5% of the petitions. These cases were in which a pros clemency grants. 24 Standards for Consideration24 Standards of Clemency Petitions; Section 9-140.11— 25 Marvin E. Wolfgang, those contain only 26 leading recommendations archives The state to 27 One of these actually a “virtual” was life sentence of 125 129 to years Moving Forward: Restoring Clemency Clemency Restoring Forward: Moving first four years in office, commuted three life commuted yearsfirst sentences in office, in four favorable Board recommendations between 1950 and 1958. Board between recommendations 1950 favorable Unlike the DepartmentUnlike prosecutors’ of Justice, offices gen Between June 1967 and May 1971, district attorneys favored district favored attorneys 1971, and May Between 1967 June had a robust passed decades since Pennsylvania Four have December 2018 Pennsylvania prosecutors less are supportPennsylvania willing to clemency Role of the Prosecuting of the ComponentRole in Clemency Matters 2003, prosecutors 2003, supported in clemency record the on The study found that district attorneys either favored or “did or “did found that districtThe study either favored attorneys Written Board recommendations show that this trend con trend this that show Board recommendations Written 3.

- -

- 22

The Board of Pardons: Functions, Functions, The Board of Pardons: , (revised 1979), made available by the by made available , (revised 1979), Josh Shapiro driven by ambition, desire to tackle big big to tackle desire ambition, driven by Shapiro Josh , Trib Live, Aug. 26, 2018, https://triblive.com/state/pennsylva 2018, 26, Aug. , Trib Live, sible for the enforcement of its laws. His office has has His office of its laws. enforcement for the sible the commission of the criminal act and what kind of individual. the convicted the community regarding affect [sic] this act has had on the community. Being affect [sic] this act has had on the community. attitudes the of electedan know should he official, personal the facts knowledge regarding concerning he is the chief prosecutor of the county and is respon The District Attorney is [] contactedThe District as for his views, Attorney Senate until her career was derailed by scandalSenate derailed by in 2016; and until her career was that emphasized the importance prosecutors of consulting the county in which the petitioner prosecuted. was If the DA tors also play an important When someonetors also role. applies play for commutation, the Board must notify the district of attorney current Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who many see as a who many General Attorney Joshcurrent Shapiro, court judge; Kathleen Kane, who considered running for U.S. court running for U.S. who considered judge; Kathleen Kane, cal springboard since it became publicly-elected in 1980. cal springboard it became since publicly-elected in 1980. careers…So that’s why you get everybody saying, ‘Ah, I’m I’m geteverybody you saying, ‘Ah, why careers…Sothat’s problems. nia/14013772-74/josh-shapiro-driven-by-ambition-desire-to-tackle-big- affected political statements. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, of Pennsylvania, Commonwealth before a decision on recommending clemency is reached: before the Board position. articulate the county’s to Soon after judge on the Third Circuit; Jerry Circuit; judgePappert, Third the on federala district been occupied by Tom Corbett, who became Pennsylvania’s Corbett,been who became occupied Tom Pennsylvania’s by board member block to commutation creates an opportunity National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Reference Criminal Justice National involved in the clemency process in Pennsylvania; prosecu in the clemency process in Pennsylvania; involved not going to vote for the guy.’” Moreover, allowing a single allowing Moreover, for the guy.’” not vote going to Governor in 2002 and now sits and now as a federalGovernor appeals in 2002 court 23 Gerald A. Gillingham, Secretary of The Board of the of Pardons 22 Wes Venteicher, Venteicher, 22 Wes Pennsylvania’s Clemency System System Clemency Pennsylvania’s problems future candidate for Governor political candidate or national future office. for enterprising board members for enterprising use make to to votes their State Clemency Project Clemency State Excluding acting and interim Attorneys General,Excluding acting Attorneys and interim the office has Duties, Responsibilities Duties, wishes support to or oppose appear a petition, he or she may Thornburgh took office in 1979, the report published a Board 1979, Thornburgh took office in The Governor parties not and Board the only are of Pardons The Office of the AttorneyThe Office of the has General served as a politi 46th Governor; Mike Fisher, who ran unsuccessfully for who ran unsuccessfully for 46th Governor; Mike Fisher, The Shifting Role of Prosecutors in of Prosecutors The Shifting Role “[n]obody wants to have that against that political their in them have “[n]obodyto wants

The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 10 The Demise of Clemency for Lifers in Pennsylvania 11 - - - - - ● -

29 Secretary Brandon Flood perspective brings this valuable to sentence) but for a breakdown in pleasentence) negotiations. but for a breakdown tion in Pennsylvania, Sept. 15, 2017, available at https://www.philly.com/ available 2017, Sept. 15, tion in Pennsylvania, to the logic the sentence imposed.to underlying originally the current Board, but he will not be in that position forever. A Board, current the will notbut he bethat positionin forever. legal The only that excludes eligibility. all lifers parole from 5,400; over to 850 roughly from populationlifer the grown has the support in doing so. enforcement of prosecutors and law gone or because positive change, society no longer adheres tion virtually inaccessible for lifers and discourages people discretionary release. Pennsylvania is one of only five states five only one of is discretionary Pennsylvania release. They should act on it, and should enlist exercise clemency. either becauseexcessive, the person sentenced has under of Tina Brosius by explaining to the Board to explaining of Tina Brosius that Brosius by might who receive decision-making guarantee that individuals or instead,it makes commuta commutations do not recidivate; us-clemency-infant-drowned-20170915.html. philly/news/crime/woman-lifer-commutation-pennsylvania-tina-brosi a unanimous Board serv recommendation individuals for personsated Board families. their and Recently-appointed permanent position person incarcerated for a formerly would Conclusion mechanism these releasing for people which commutation, is been since youth—some incarcerated for crimes have many killing. These intentional sentences benot would involving revisiting the 1997 constitutional amendment that requires the 1997 revisiting ing life sentences. That policy does the Board’s not improve help shield the process from future administrative changes. changes.help shield the process administrative future from Since then,has been virtually impossible obtain to since 1980. have pled to third-degree pled to does (which murder not carryhave a life 29 Samantha Melamed, up for commuta lifer in 27 years First woman from petitioningfrom for clemency. Ensuring the long-term availability of clemency for lifers availability Ensuring the long-term should designate the legislature a position on the Finally, Board for somebody who represents the interests of incarcer will require institutional Legislatorswill require change. should consider The Board of Pardons and Governor have a broad mandate to mandate a broad The BoardGovernor and have of Pardons viewed as draconian in almost any other country. as draconian in almost other viewed country. any A healthy criminal justice system requires for mechanisms justice system criminal healthy A prove later A sentence that once seemed may appropriate

------Certain comments—for sensational instance, 28 speculate on an individual’s rehabilitation, which is a clinical which is a rehabilitation, speculate on an individual’s sibility of chairing the Board of Pardons. Mr. Fetterman is Fetterman the Boardsibility of chairing Mr. of Pardons. today. In 2017, for example, former Dauphin Countyformer Dauphin District for example, 2017, In today. to express their office’s position. District should attorneys expressto their office’s great influence over the Board’s decision-making process. the By over great influence Board’s to the commutation process.to to housing and employment for individuals convicted of of convicted for individuals and employment housing to there seemsthere be to state among interest reform in back-end convicted of the same crime might beconvicted punished differently question for psychologists. appropriate Better more use of pros ecutorial expertise be explain the influence of plea- would to descriptions of crimes committed decades earlier—are unin establish guidelines for line prosecutors who testify at clem ency hearings. ecuted in their county petitions for clemency, and they are ecuted in their county petitions for clemency, collateral consequences;collateral their efforts extend they should criminal justice One of his first reform. actsto appointwas certainmisdemeanors it does(though those aid nothing to clemency power without concern for reelection. without concern clemency power Meanwhile, as Secretary the Board of a 38-year-old incarcer formerly ated person and named Fetterman Brandon Flood. So far, an unconventional politician has expressed who an unconventional interestin a second term in office, Governor Wolf is free to exercise his to free Wolf is a second in office,Governor term bargaining on a petitioner’s a person advise sentencehow or to Manual, 9-140.111 – Role of the Prosecuting – Role Component in Clemency Manual, 9-140.111 at https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm- Matters (added April 2018), available invited to appear to beforeinvited the Board in person or in writing Clemency in Pennsylvania has new, reform-minded leaders. has new, Clemency in Pennsylvania law, prosecutors pros notified an individual are whenever law, legislators. The 2018 “Clean Slate” Bill removes barriers barriers removes Bill Slate” “Clean 2018 legislators. The 9-140000-pardon-attorney. 28 can be A useful Manual, Justice DOJ’s found in Title 9 of the template formative and prejudicial. Nor is it helpful for prosecutors Nor to and prejudicial. formative

Revitalizing clemency will require that Fetterman and Floodand Fetterman that clemency require will Revitalizing Flood have emphasized the use of pardons to mitigate emphasizedFlood the use mitigate to of pardons have Lieutenant Governor, an office which comes with the respon Governor, Lieutenant work effectively with the State’s district attorneys, who have district who have attorneys, with the State’s effectively work who are currently incarcerated). incarcerated). currently who are Attorney John Cherry John supportedAttorney the successful application Voters recently elected John Fetterman as the State’s 34th as the State’s elected recently Fetterman John Voters “Role of the Prosecuting Component in Clemency Matters.” Justice Justice of the Prosecuting“Role Component in Clemency Matters.” State Clemency Project

Acknowledgments This report was drafted by Research Fellow Ben Notterman and edited by the Center’s Executive Director, Courtney M. Oliva. The Center thanks the Vital Projects Fund for its financial and strategic support. Furman Academic Scholar Alexander Arnold ’21 provided archival research that was essential for getting this project off the ground. Additional research was provided by Princess Umodu ’20 and Rupa Subramaniam ’20. The report was designed Tina Brosius by Michael Bierman. Sentence: Life Incarcerated Since: 1994 About the Center Commuted: December 2018 The Center on the Administration of Criminal Law Tina Brosius, 43, was the first woman to receive analyzes important issues of criminal law, with a special commutation in Pennsylvania since 1990. She was focus on prosecutorial power and discretion. It pursues convicted of first degree murder as an 18-year-old this mission in three main arenas: academia, the courts, after the drowning of her infant child. According to and public policy debates. the Philadelphia Inquirer, current District Dauphin County District Attorney Ed Marsico opposed com- Through the academic component, the Center mutation based on several factors, including that she researches criminal justice practices at all levels of is still within childbearing years. However, the DA government, produces scholarship on criminal justice who prosecuted Brosius, John Cherry (now a judge), issues, and hosts symposia and conferences to address supported her petition and explained that Brosius significant topics in criminal law and procedure. The received a life sentence only after the breakdown of litigation component uses the Center’s research and expe- negotiations to plead to third-degree murder. rience with criminal justice practices to inform courts in important criminal justice matters, particularly in cases in which exercises of prosecutorial discretion create significant legal issues. The public policy component applies the Center’s criminal justice expertise to improve practices in the criminal justice system and enhance the public dialogue on criminal justice matters. William Smith To contact, contribute to, or read more about the Center, Sentence: Life please visit www.prosecutioncenter.org or write to Incarcerated Since: 1968 [email protected]. Commuted: March 2019 William Smith, age 77, was sentenced to first-degree under the felony murder doctrine after his accom- plice to a robbery fatally shot a store owner. Smith has significant health problems. He initially failed to receive the Board’s unanimous approval after 139 MacDougal Street, Room 307 Attorney General Josh Shapiro cast the lone dissent- New York, New York 10012 ing vote. Shapiro changed his position at a rehearing [email protected] six months later, after Philadelphia District Attorney www.prosecutioncenter.org stated his office no longer opposed clemency.