State House Democrats on Thursday rejected a proposal by Senate Republicans to re-write the penalties for second-degree murder. And Western Pennsylvania's most prominent prosecutor now hopes to delay a Friday deadline for changing the rules.
At issue is a dispute over how to respond to a March state Supreme Court ruling that mandatory life sentences for second-degree murder are unconstitutional. The court gave the legislature until Friday to propose different sentencing guidelines for the offense, which can be charged against a defendant who participates in a crime that results in a homicide, even if the defendant did not directly cause the death.
But disagreements between the Republican-controlled Senate and the Democratic-led House — particularly over whether to base sentencing rules on mandatory minimum terms or mandatory maximums — have made it all but impossible for the legislature to meet that deadline.
On Thursday, the House rewrote a proposal previously passed by the Senate. One provision of the bill would grant some people who were convicted of second-degree murder a chance for medical parole if they faced serious health conditions. Democrats said the proposal "strengthens compassionate release" and saves the state "millions of dollars without compromising public safety," according to a statement from House Speaker Joanna McClinton.
But because both chambers must pass identical versions of the bill — and the Senate is not scheduled for a session Friday — there is no time for the Senate to react before the deadline.
In a last-ditch effort Thursday, Allegheny County District Attorney Steve Zappala urged the state Supreme Court to push back its deadline back for 120 days. That would buy time for prosecutors who have said victims' families would otherwise soon be notified of sentencing appeals as a result of legislative inaction.
Republicans voice concern
Nearly a dozen Republicans voiced concern about the Democratic-backed approach.
"I believe in second chances, I believe in redemption, but I cannot forgive an individual who raped a 4-year-old and then murdered that child," said state Rep. Eric Davanzo of Westmoreland County. "I believe that individual that raped and murdered that child should die in prison regardless of any health issues they develop over the years."
House Democratic leader Matt Bradford said Democrats were seeking to change sentences for people accused of committing less serious offenses, and crimes like those Davanzo described would not be affected.
"You don't need to go to Yale Law School to know that," Bradford said. "There are heinous, horrible crimes that were committed by these individuals, and they should serve an exorbitant amount of time."
Still, he said, "When we created an unconstitutional law ... we set up communities that were victimized for what we must now fix."
Senate Republicans issued a statement Thursday calling it "gravely troubling" that the state deadline will be missed.
Once the deadline passes, hundreds of lifers could ask courts for release or new sentences.
Republican House leader Jesse Topper said he believed the two chambers could resolve their differences in a matter of weeks.
"But I have cautioned… lobbing bills back and forth has not really shown to be an effective way to reach a conclusion on these kind of issues," Topper said in the House Rules committee.
AG Sunday, DAs raised concerns ahead of vote
Prior to the vote, Attorney General Dave Sunday penned a letter Thursday requesting members vote against the Democratic-backed amendments.
Sunday called the Democratic sentencing framework "grossly inadequate," disagreed with the addition of medical parole for several reasons, and said offenders would be able "to forum shop for early release" if the court deadline lapsed.
Sunday, along with several county district attorneys and Republican lawmakers, met earlier in the week for press events with a similar message.
Several events this week featured Republican state lawmakers and county district attorneys, who said that if House Democrats didn't pass the Senate version of the bill, they would risk the 1,160 people sentenced to life in prison appealing their terms.
But McClinton's office warned in advance of Thursday's vote that the Senate bill would be unlikely to pass.
"It has become clear that no legislative solution will be negotiated before the end of the 120-day period. Decisions as important as these should not be politicized," said Nicole Reigelman, McClinton's spokesperson.
"In the continued absence of agreement on a path forward, we will continue [to] rely on the sound judgement of courts across this commonwealth to impose just sentences," she said.
She noted that in 2012 after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that juvenile life sentences were unconstitutional, the resentencing process for hundreds of incarcerated people has taken more than a decade — and those who may request resentencing for their own felony-murder cases also won't find answers quickly, Reigelman said.
"This is not the first time the commonwealth has experienced this," she added.
During three occasions this week — including one Wednesday with state Attorney General Dave Sunday — Harrisburg Republicans said their measure to offer a 35-year mandatory minimum sentence for offenders is necessary to prevent "chaos" at county-level courts and among victims' families.
Their proposal, which was sent on the House as an amendment to a House bill, offered a path to parole for lifers with second-degree convictions. The measure passed 30-20, with four Democrats agreeing.
House Democrats, by contrast, supported parole after 20 years, setting a mandatory maximum instead of a minimum, among other differences.
Prior to Thursday's vote, Senate Appropriations chair Scott Martin said leaving the disposition of second-degree murder sentences up to a patchwork of judicial decisions is unacceptable.
"Can you imagine if 67 counties had started sentencing people in 67 different ways? And then the whole 'nother level of appeals and lawsuits related to disproportionate treatment under the law? It's just, it's going to create chaos," he told reporters in Lancaster.
Case involved 2014 Pittsburgh robbery, shooting
The state Supreme Court case at the heart of the ruling involved a 2014 Pittsburgh robbery that led to a fatal shooting: Derek Lee was convicted of second-degree murder even though he was on another floor of the home at the time of the killing.
Through a spokesperson, the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court declined to comment on the possible lapse in state sentencing guidance.
Lawmakers said about 580 cases in which resentencing could be sought are based in Philadelphia. Zappala's office did not respond to a request for comment about the number of cases that could require resentencing locally.
Attorney General Sunday agreed on Wednesday that the worst-case scenario described by some legislators this week — that more than 1,100 people convicted of felony murder would soon be released if an agreement is not reached on the law — were unlikely to unfold.
"That's not the way that the system works," Sunday said.
But he added that if the deadline expires, "the very next day will most likely be hundreds of petitions for resentencing. ... [W]hen you have that many petitions filed all throughout the entirety of Pennsylvania, you're going to have a complete chaotic situation" for prosecutors and families of victims.
"This will ultimately work its way back up to the [state] Supreme Court again, and that might be on the issue of maybe retroactivity," Sunday added.
Prior to the House vote, Martin explained that if the House missed the deadline by rejecting the Senate version and acting on another proposal, it would would show the House is "just playing games."
"There's an easy, simple solution to this that they could do and would make this all right," he said Wednesday.
Read more from our partners at WESA.