Oregonians support reducing prison sentences for youth who demonstrate rehabilitation

By Anna Del Savio
Oregon Capital Bureau

Decades after Oregonians approved Measure 11, instituting mandatory minimum sentences for some serious crimes, just under half of Oregonians think it’s fair to sentence adult offenders to the same time in custody regardless of age, a recent survey found.

Measure 11 established mandatory minimum sentences for 16 crimes — later amended to 21 crimes — ranging from five years and 10 months for crimes like second degree robbery or assault to 25 years for murder. For juveniles age 15 and older who were charged with Measure 11 offenses, the measure also required that they be tried as adults and subjected to the mandatory minimums.

Oregon reversed part of Measure 11 in 2019, when the state legislature approved a bill that made it so 15- to 17-year-olds are no longer automatically tried as adults and prohibited sentencing minors to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

Mandatory minimum sentences still apply for those 18 and older, meaning that someone convicted of a Measure 11 crime — most of which are violent offenses or sex crimes — can’t be released early, even for good behavior.

Measure 11 reduced room for judicial discretion, which proponents said would reduce disparities between sentences given by different judges, but opponents said it would eliminate judges’ ability to consider mitigating factors like young age.

In the survey conducted by the Oregon Values and Beliefs Center in December, 49% of respondents said they believed it was fair to require judges to sentence a 19-year-old to prison for the same duration as an offender “well into adulthood.” A smaller portion, 38%, said that was unfair.

A significant majority of Oregonians, 81%, agreed that Oregon youth in the legal justice system should be able to have their sentences reduced if they demonstrate rehabilitation, like through good behavior or completing programs.

Though the 2019 bill removed 15- to 17-year-olds from mandatory minimums, many Oregonians believe that those in their late teens or early 20s aren’t fully matured.

“Our justice system is more about punishment than rehabilitation, so putting younger offenders in with older, hardened career criminals is bound to create recidivism,” a Multnomah County woman responded.

The human brain isn’t fully matured until the mid-to-late 20s. The prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for decision making, planning and impulse control, is the last area to finish developing.

A Deschutes County man said his adopted son “spent most of his youth in and out of confinement for petty crimes.”

“I saw his personality change over that period into an anti-authority hot head. Prison is a different animal to the youth,” the man wrote in his survey response.

Other survey respondents said defendants should have the prospect of faster freedom available to motivate them.

“Everyone changes over time, and should be rewarded for positive behavioral changes. If the potential for reduced sentences can provide the incentive then I’m all for it,” another Deschutes County man wrote.

The question of sentencing often boiled down to what the goal of incarceration is.

“I think the point of incarceration, whenever feasible, should be rehabilitation, otherwise what are we doing? Being vindictive doesn’t help anyone,” one woman responded. “We’re locking people up, making them angrier, sadder, more addicted and desperate and releasing them, expecting them to do what?”

A woman who lived in the area in 1998 when Kip Kinkel, a 15-year-old, killed both his parents before fatally shooting two students and wounding 25 others at Thurston High School in Springfield pointed to the case as an extreme example of the difficulty of weighing the goals of incarceration.

Kinkel, who was later diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, was sentenced to 111 years in prison without the possibility of parole.

“I’m undecided about whether he should be released from prison,” the woman responded. “If we keep him imprisoned, is that merely revenge? If he is released, will he reoffend? What is a fair balance for taking a life? Very difficult questions.”

There are currently 245 people in Oregon Department of Corrections custody who were convicted under Measure 11 for crimes they committed before they turned 18, according to Department of Corrections data. More than half were convicted of sex crimes.

Oregonians were mostly in agreement on the importance of ensuring that everyone accused of a crime has access to an attorney, with 85% of survey respondents saying it is “very important.” Most Oregonians across the political spectrum agreed, but with some difference; 88% of socially liberal Oregonians said it was very important, compared to 81% of socially conservative Oregonians.

Some survey respondents said they weren’t convinced that all of the defendants who sought court-appointed attorneys were truly unable to afford hiring an attorney.

Under state law, people charged with crimes are eligible for a public defender if they are “financially unable to retain adequate representation without substantial hardship in providing basic economic necessities” for themselves or their families. The Public Defense Services Commission is responsible for setting the standards for what constitutes “financially unable.”