WeVote
Log In

Bill

AA

Bill

HB 4164

Criminal procedure: sentencing; sentencing individuals less than 19 to imprisonment for life without parole eligibility; amend probate code of 1939 to prohibit. Amends sec. 18, ch. XIIA of 1939 PA 288 (MCL 712A.18). TIE BAR WITH: HB 4160'23, HB 4161'23, HB 4162'23, HB 4163'23

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Abraham Aiyash and 9 co-sponsors

Michigan bill prohibits life-without-parole sentences for anyone under 19, allowing parole eligibility review instead of permanent incarceration.

placed on third reading
#courts:circuitcourt #criminalprocedure:sentencing #juveniles:crimes #juveniles:criminalprocedure
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4164

Legislative bill overview

HB 4164 amends Michigan's Probate Code to prohibit sentencing individuals under age 19 to life imprisonment without parole eligibility. The bill eliminates mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles convicted of crimes, though it does not necessarily prevent lengthy sentences or eventual parole consideration. This change is tied to four companion bills addressing broader juvenile criminal procedure reforms.

Why is this important

Current law allows Michigan courts to sentence juveniles as young as 14 to life without parole for certain crimes, making Michigan one of few states with this practice. This bill would align Michigan with U.S. Supreme Court precedent (Miller v. Alabama, 2012) recognizing that mandatory life sentences for juveniles raise constitutional concerns about proportionality and individual circumstances. The practical effect is that all juveniles convicted of crimes would retain some possibility of parole review, though sentences could remain decades-long.

Potential points of contention

  • Victim advocacy concerns: Families of crime victims may argue that eliminating life-without-parole sentences inadequately holds offenders accountable for serious crimes and reduces closure through finality of sentence
  • Judicial discretion trade-offs: While the bill removes mandatory sentences, it may increase sentencing disparity if judges exercise broad discretion to impose varying lengthy terms for similar crimes by similarly-aged offenders
  • Public safety debate: Disagreement exists over whether parole eligibility for juveniles sentenced to 40-60 year terms meaningfully increases risk, or whether it simply aligns practice with developmental research showing adolescent capacity for rehabilitation

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.