Five years ago this week in a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court declared that its prior 2012 ruling in Miller v. Alabama applied retroactively, thereby requiring that hundreds of former life-sentenced children like myself be resentenced.

I recall that day being one of subdued jubilation tempered by cautious optimism, having absolutely no confidence in how the sentencing judge or the parole board would respond to this High Court mandate. Would I be given an opportunity to live a meaningful life…
...or would I be condemned to prison for the rest of my life? Terrifying questions that had no immediate answers.
On June 27, 2017, I was resentenced to a term of 30-to-life. Following a successful parole hearing in August, on October 10, 2017, after being disappeared from society for over three decades, I walked out of prison on parole for life.
Sadly, in the four-year interim between the Miller and Montgomery decisions, my mother lost her battle with cancer. She was my last surviving (immediate) family member. For me, the Montgomery decision serves as a painfully cruel reminder that “justice delayed, is justice denied.”
On this fifth anniversary of Montgomery v. Louisiana, while lamenting my mother's loss, I received a home visit from a newly assigned parole officer. For the past two years, I have had minimal supervision from my last two parole agents.
I’ve had one home visit in nearly 30 months and not a single urinalysis. Finally, I was beginning to feel like I was free. But I was asked to provide a urine sample and was informed that I would be receiving a home visit every 90 days, just as was required when first released.
The irony is that, by all accounts, my adjustment has been exemplary -- not a single infraction. The only thing that has changed is the assignment of a new parole agent who comes with a new orientation.
For a second, it made me think: If I’m being forever subjected to such arbitrary whims, precisely what does it mean to be free? Then I thought of Mr. Henry Montgomery, whose case favorably decided retroactivity, and who at 74 years old, remains incarcerated.
Profoundly, this anniversary has driven home for me the reality that “none of us are truly free until all of us are free.”

More from Law

This issue was repeatedly highlighted bu Judge Totenberg:

Dominion’s system “does not produce a voter-verifiable paper ballot or a paper ballot marked with the voter’s choices in a format readable by the voter because the votes are tabulated solely from the unreadable QR code.”


Judge also found that Dominion's QR codes are NOT encrypted:

“Evidence plainly contradicts any contention that the QR codes or digital signatures are encrypted,”

This was “ultimately conceded by Mr. Cobb and expressly acknowledged later by Dr. Coomer during his testimony.”

Judge Totenberg said there was “demonstrable evidence” that the implementation of Dominion’s systems by Georgia placed voters at an “imminent risk of deprivation of their fundamental right to cast an effective vote,” which she defined as a “vote that is accurately counted.”

Judge Totenberg found that Dominion Systems inherently could not be audited.

She noted that auditors are severely limited and “can only determine whether the BMD printout was tabulated accurately, not whether the election outcome is correct.“

Totenberg stated in her ruling that a BMD printout “is not trustworthy” and the application of an Risk-Limiting audit (RLA) to an election that used BMD printouts “does not yield a true risk-limiting audit.”

Georgia used RLAs to claim no fraud...

You May Also Like