RALEIGH -- A ruling by the N.C. Supreme Court will keep in prison dozens of inmates sentenced to life in prison in the 1970s, capping a fierce debate that has entangled the courts and the state's politicians since October.
The decision dashed the hopes of the inmates, who argued they were due to be released. Their lawyers have been pressing the state's highest courts for years to win their freedom.
The fight may not be over. Lawyers for the inmates said Friday they might appeal to federal courts.
The public debate over the inmates' future erupted in October, when the state Supreme Court affirmed a Court of Appeals decision that defined life sentences imposed between 1974 and 1978 as 80 years. Since then, lawyers for the inmates have argued that they were due credits for good behavior - working jobs or taking classes in prison - that they said reduced their sentences and made some of them eligible for release.
Friday, five Supreme Court justices decided the state Department of Correction hadn't officially awarded the credits and shouldn't now be forced to award them. Two justices disagreed, saying the decision undermined fundamental fairness.
Lawyers for the inmates had fought on two fronts - with legal papers in courthouses and in debates to sway public opinion. The potential release of dozens of convicted murderers and rapists evoked strong protest from politicians, including Gov. Bev Perdue.
Staples Hughes, the state appellate defender and lawyer for several of the inmates, said politics and the theatrics of the debate influenced the outcome.
"I can only have faith that the federal courts perform their historical role in vindicating the rights of the powerless," Hughes said.
Crime victims' advocates welcomed Friday's ruling.
'Some ... still dangerous'
"It affirms justice, common sense and public safety," said Tom Bennett, executive director of the N.C. Victim Assistance Network. "Some of the 133 criminals affected by this decision are still dangerous and should never walk the streets again. The notion that all of them deserve unsupervised release is absurd, and we hope this is the end of the matter."
After the initial Supreme Court ruling, inmates Faye Brown and Alford Jones sought release on the basis of credits they thought they were due. In December, Superior Court Judge Ripley Rand ruled that they were owed their freedom once credits reduced their sentences from 80 years to less than 40. The Attorney General's office appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments on the matter in February.
At the heart of Friday's ruling was a simple question: Had prison officials already applied good behavior and work credits to these 1970s lifers? If so, could they now retract them?
No time off sentences
Justice Robert H. Edmunds Jr. said in the majority opinion that prison officials had only applied the credits to consider parole eligibility and to determine whether inmates could move to a lower security facility. Edmunds ruled that the Department of Correction never meant to apply the credits toward their sentences.
Two justices said prison officials had awarded the credits and ought to be required to honor them.
Justice Patricia Timmons-Goodson wrote in dissent: "The DOC essentially argues that because it has fundamentally misapprehended the nature of Jones' sentence for the past thirty years, it should be allowed to perpetuate its mistake and retroactively eliminate the sentence reduction credits awarded to Jones. This argument flied in the face of bedrock principles of securing fundamental fairness in the criminal justice system."
Perdue proclaims relief
Perdue issued a statement Friday expressing relief. She sounded alarms in October, breaking the news of the court's opinion on the meaning of the 1970s-era life sentence by producing a list of more than 20 inmates who would have to be released.
"We can all sleep a little sounder tonight knowing that violent prisoners will not be released into our communities without review or supervision," Perdue said in a statement.
Alvin Keller, secretary of the Department of Correction, said he, too, will sleep better. He thanked the court for its ruling and said at a news conference Friday that he hoped all the inmates would reach a point at which they could be eligible for supervised parole.
2 get out on passes
Brown and Jones, the inmates at the center of Friday's ruling, already spend time outside prison.
Brown, who was convicted of murder after she accompanied two men in a bank robbery and chase that killed a highway patrolman, spends her days on work release, tending to the books at a beauty school near downtown Raleigh. Jones had worked for a chicken plant before an injury; he has received passes for home visits.
Of the 27 inmates listed as being due for release in October, three have since been paroled. Four have permission to leave prison for work or worship.
All are eligible for release through parole and will continue to be considered for supervised release by the parole board.
