Wilson Rivera was a teenager when he was locked up on murder charges. He still maintains his innocence over 20 years later.
“I was not going to allow myself to be a victim. And I wasn't going to allow myself to die in prison,” Rivera said.
At the time of his sentencing, Rivera had a daughter who was only a few months old. He said she and his desire to prove his innocence keep him going.
Since being locked up, Rivera’s gotten involved in prison programming, earned a college degree, and became a legal writer to help other inmates fight their cases. Now, there’s an effort to give Rivera and others another chance via legislation known as “second look.”
“When we first heard about it in here, it motivated a lot of the individuals around me. You could sense or you could tell when something is going on … because when it affects a person, you could tell by the way the person walks,” Rivera said.
The second look bills would allow people in prison, with some exceptions, to ask for a new sentence after serving 20 years.
Nazgol Ghandnoosh is with The Sentencing Project, a national nonprofit working to reduce the incarceration rate in the U.S. She said studies have shown people who have served long sentences are less likely to re-offend.
“Research by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the U.S. Sentencing Commission has found that after six to 10 years of incarceration, recidivism rates fall dramatically. And that's because many of these people have aged out of criminal activity,” Ghandnoosh told members of the House Criminal Justice Committee in March.
That was during a first committee hearing on the legislation.
Some Republicans, the Democratic state attorney general, and local prosecutors all opposed the bills. Kalamazoo County Prosecutor Jeff Getting told committee members the package would make Michigan more dangerous if passed.
“It will release, almost exclusively, violent offenders. Almost no one else … gets 10 years or more,” Getting said.
Opponents succeeded in stalling the legislation, which had also been introduced in the state Senate but never received a committee hearing. But supporters were undeterred.
A few dozen advocates of second look and other criminal justice legislation gathered outside the state Capitol in mid-November, after the election, to renew their push for legislative action.
With Democrats losing control of the House in January, some saw it as now or never. Representative Kara Hope (D-Holt) who chairs the House Criminal Justice Committee, noted the frustration.
“You may be asking yourself, ‘She supports the bills. And it’s her committee. What the hell?’ That’s a fair question — that is a fair question. I don’t have a great answer for you other than politics,” Hope told the crowd in Lansing.
Hope did move the bills out of committee against the protests of her Republican vice chair. Representative Graham Filler (R-Duplain Twp) said the package would skew proceedings in favor of the incarcerated.
“You're still talking about an individual who spent, for a second look, 20 years in prison and now for a murder, second-degree murder, something incredibly serious. And now you're going to give them a chance to get a rehearing which deals with revictimization,” Filler said.
Filler and his allies say prison sentences are fine as they are and raise doubts about the idea of people serving life without parole getting out of prison.
Meanwhile, advocates say people would still need to go through the parole board as a check on the way to release. They argue the state is wasting money locking away people who could otherwise be productive members of society.
Rivera said he and others on the inside just want people on the outside to see their humanity.
“We know we've committed harm. We're not negating those facts, but give us a chance to be productive in an environment so that we could stop other individuals from doing any harm out there, that we can help these individuals so that they don't have to go through the same journey that we've been through. And it would not be a waste of time. It will not be a waste of breath, Trust me,” Rivera said.
For the first time last week, it looked like the bills had a chance of moving forward. They were scheduled for House votes. And Democrats were up against an end-of-the-year deadline, adding urgency. But that vote never came.
