Del. Cheryl Pasteur (D-Baltimore County), left, listens to House Minority Whip Jesse Pippy (R-Frederick) explain why he doesn’t support Pasteur’s Second Look Act, which passed the House Monday on an 89-49 vote. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters)
The House voted 89-49 Monday to approve a bill that would let those incarcerated for 20 years or more petition a judge to have their sentences reduced.
Passage of the bill, known as the Second Look Act, followed 30 minutes of emotionally charged debate Monday, a continuation of more than two hours of debate Saturday, as House Republicans tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill to make a number of violent crimes ineligible for it.
House Minority Leader Jesse Pippy (R-Frederick) said Monday that amendments rejected Saturday focused on the “worst of the worst” of those incarcerated and convicted of crimes, such as murder of children, domestic violence homicides and the killing of police and parole officers.
“I 100% sympathize with the bill’s sponsor, who has probably had a lot of time to process, and I can’t imagine,” Pippy said, looking toward the bill’s sponsor, Del. Cheryl Pasteur (D-Baltimore County), who gave an emotional recounting Saturday of an attempted rape when she was a teenager.
“I’ve got to stand up for all the other victims,” Pippy said. “I got to stand up for all the other families who may not be ready for this legislation.”
But Pasteur, a retired educator, said that some of those in prison deserve the second chance at life the bill offers.
“I know that so many of the young people who ended up prison who fall under this bill are not the worst of the worst,” she said. “My commitment is that long as I draw breath in God’s world … I will commit to an organization to support every person … who comes out on Second Look that I will know their names. No one should come out of prison and be alone.”
Supporters stressed the bill is not a get-out-jail-free card and apply to about 350 people.
Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City), chair of the Judiciary Committee, has said the bill would only apply to people convicted of a crime they committed between the ages of 18 and 25. It would not be available for those sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
A victim or a victim’s representative would be able to submit an impact statement to the court “regarding the impact of the crime and the proposed sentence reduction.”
The bill was a priority for the Legislative Black Caucus, but at least one of its members, Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Charles County) said he can’t support “murderers.” He was one of a handful of Democrats who voted against the bill.
“You may sit here and judge me as heartless, unsympathetic, or without compassion. Maybe that’s true,” Wilson said on the House floor before he voted against the bill. “But I dedicated my entire time up here to fighting for victims. I cannot sit here and fight for the rights of murderers when their victims lie rotting away in silence.”
Del. Gabriel Acevero (D-Montgomery) said he supported the legislation for those who are innocent of alleged crimes committed.
“I heard no mention of innocent Marylanders who would benefit from this bill,” said Acevero, who cited a few people imprisoned who were later deemed innocent, such as Gary Washington. “Let’s be clear who you’re voting against when you don’t vote for this bill: It’s the innocent.”
Now the House bill heads to the Senate, where a hearing was held Jan. 30 on a Senate version of the bill sponsored by Sen. Charles Sydnor III (D-Baltimore County). It has not yet advanced out of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, but the full Senate last year approved the bill, which failed in the House.
Sen. William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery), chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, said Monday he hasn’t seen the final House version passed Monday afternoon, but that, “It’s a priority for me.”
“We’ll get a look at it and run it by committee,” he said. “It’ll be a vigorous debate in committee and if it advances out of committee on the [Senate] floor.”