Some California inmates serving life sentences without parole could be released: SB 94

CALIFORNIA – A California Senate bill that would require parole hearings for some inmates serving life sentences without the possibility of parole faced stiff opposition Thursday from opponents who call the proposal a slap in the face to victims’ families and a danger to society.

But supporters say the bill would align with the state’s “modern justice system” by changing “extreme criminal laws” that led to mass incarceration.

Republican lawmakers and victims’ advocates, including family members affected by the violence, attended Thursday’s press conference condemning Senate Bill 94.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco told reporters gathered at the state Capitol that the life sentence without parole is reserved for the “worst of the worst … violent criminals who have committed heinous crimes.”

Bianco, who also uses his tough stance on crime in politics, said he has looked violent criminals in the eye and listened to them.

“They are not like you and me,” he told reporters, adding that the convicts were dangerous and should never be released, without exception.

Senate Bill 94 provides some leeway. It would allow judges to consider facts not previously considered in court, including whether the convicted person was a victim of domestic violence, child abuse, racial bias in the justice system or other factors.

Life imprisonment without possibility of parole

The intention behind a life sentence without parole is to serve out the days in prison. The sentence can only be imposed in extreme cases, such as premeditated murder under special circumstances that make the killing particularly heinous; rape and other serious sexual crimes involving extreme violence, multiple victims, or crimes against children; kidnapping with aggravating circumstances including violence; and treason.

However, Senate Bill 94 would open up the possibility of parole hearings for some of these inmates. Under the bill, which has been amended several times, judges would be able to decide whether the old cases now warrant a parole hearing. Inmates who committed their crimes before June 5, 1990, and who have served at least 25 years in prison would be eligible. Inmates convicted of killing a police officer would not be eligible under the bill.

Under SB 94, if a parole hearing has resulted in a release recommendation, the governor’s approval is required before an inmate can be released.

State Senator Kelly Seyarto (R-Murrieta) was present at Thursday’s press conference. He told reporters that SB 94 was unfair to the victims’ families. The still-grieving relatives were promised at the sentencing that the convicted man would never be released and that there would be no possibility of parole hearings.

The victims’ families should not have to relive the trauma of the hearings, Seyarto said. “It’s not fair.”

The bill is a “fight for the criminals and against the victims,” said Seyarto.

However, according to SB 94 supporters, some of the inmates eligible under SB 94 were themselves victims, including women who were forced by their tormentors to participate in a crime.

Victims and perpetrators

State Senator Brian Jones (R-San Diego) was at Thursday’s press conference. He offered no clemency for those serving life without parole. He listed brutal murders where he believes the convicted perpetrators could receive parole hearings under SB 94. He mentioned the case of Richard Phillips, who was convicted in 1977 of the robbery and murder of Bruce Bartulis and the attempted murder of Ron Rose and sentenced to life without parole.

In this case, Phillips lured Bartulis and Rose from Southern California to Madera County to rob them. Once in Madera County, Phillips took the two men to a deserted area along Highway 99, where he shot them multiple times, stole their wallets, doused them with gasoline, and set them on fire.

Rose, who was still alive, managed to escape. Phillips then chased him in his car and hit him.

Another inmate, Timothy Morris, was sentenced to life without parole in 1986 by Judge Robert Shaw of the Ventura County Superior Court. Morris was found guilty of murdering 68-year-old William Nye in his ranch home near Ojai. A jury also found Morris guilty of robbery and burglary in the commission of the crime.

Nye, who was deaf and had only one leg, was beaten to death with the leg of a wooden table and a fireplace hook.

According to Jones, Morris would also be entitled to a parole hearing under SB 94.

Lauren Pettigrew is legislative director of the Auburn-based nonprofit Crime Victims United, founded by Harriet Salarno. In 1979, Salarno’s 18-year-old daughter was murdered “execution-style” on her first day at Pacific University in Stockton.

Pettigrew told reporters Thursday that SB 94 was “a slap in the face” to the victims’ families.

In 2007, Pettigrew’s brother, David, was murdered in Long Beach by three people sentenced to life without parole. Although the perpetrators are ineligible for parole hearings under SB 94 due to the age of their cases, she said the life without parole sentence is intended to provide closure for victims like her.

Reliving the murder during parole hearings would be too traumatic, she said. Her children don’t yet know the details of her uncle David’s death, but when they do, she hopes to reassure them that his killers will never get out of prison, Pettigrew said.

History of Senate Bill 94

SB 94, introduced by Senator Dave Cortese (D-San Jose) in early 2023, was on hold for months but is back on the table.

When Cortese introduced the bill, he said, “SB 94 would allow a small group of the oldest incarcerated Californians to petition a judge for a parole hearing. People who… have demonstrated full rehabilitation after decades in prison would face an intensive evaluation at three levels: the judge, the parole board and the governor.”

He continued, “Older people who have turned their lives around after decades behind bars would have the opportunity to reintegrate into society rather than continuing to contribute to mass incarceration. It is time to bring these cases into line with California’s modern justice system.”

In an August 12, 2024 KCRA article, Cortese told the newspaper, “SB 94 creates a tough four-step process…. Most requests for a hearing are expected to be denied. This bill is a conservative approach for the few cases that qualify for and deserve review. I am confident that with the changes made to the bill, we will get enough votes to send it to the Governor later this month.”

State Rep. James Gallagher (R-Chico) hopes the bill fails. He led Thursday’s press conference and told reporters, “This bill is not just bad policy; it is an insult to justice and to all the people who have suffered at the hands of these criminals.”

According to Cortese’s office, SB 94 is supported by the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, the Felony Murder Elimination Project, the California Coalition for Women Prisoners, the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, Californians United for a Responsible Budget, Families United to End Life Without Parole, Center for Employment Opportunity, FAMM and the Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition.