Settling Down Behind Bars

Published date01 December 2015
DOI10.1177/0032885515596521
Date01 December 2015
AuthorDoris Schartmueller
Subject MatterArticles
The Prison Journal
2015, Vol. 95(4) 449 –471
© 2015 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0032885515596521
tpj.sagepub.com
Article
Settling Down Behind
Bars: The Extensive
Use of Life Sentences in
Alabama
Doris Schartmueller1
Abstract
In many U.S. states, the number of inmates serving life with or without
parole has skyrocketed in recent decades. In Alabama, a state with
particularly high incarceration rates, approximately every sixth inmate is
serving a life sentence. This research investigates which specific factors led
to Alabama’s extensive use of life sentences. Findings suggest that Alabama’s
lifer population largely stems from an inadvertent application of the state’s
Habitual Felony Offender Statute. Furthermore, the state’s stringent
discretionary parole practices have minimized the chances of release for
parole-eligible lifers. These factors have contributed to prison overcrowding
and the aging of inmates.
Keywords
Alabama, prison population, life sentences, elderly inmates
Introduction
Since the late 1970s, the United States has experienced a sharp rise in its
prison population, bringing the country’s incarceration rates to unprecedented
levels. One feature of the massive incarceration boom has been the growing
1California State University, Chico, USA
Corresponding Author:
Doris Schartmueller, Department of Political Science, California State University, Chico,
400 W 1st Street, Chico, CA-95929, USA.
596521TPJXXX10.1177/0032885515596521The Prison JournalSchartmueller
research-article2015
450 The Prison Journal 95(4)
popularity of life sentences (Leigey, 2010). Against the backdrop of escalat-
ing crime rates, the “war on drugs,” and a tougher stand on criminal behavior
in general, the goal was to lock up criminal offenders for ever longer periods
of time and, in the form of life sentences, avoid giving them a guaranteed date
of release from prison (Gottschalk, 2006; van Zyl Smit, 2002). While the
majority of lifers1 in the United States eventually become eligible for parole
after having served a minimum time behind bars and if found suitable for
release, some lifers are serving a particular type of a life sentence, the life
without parole (LWOP) version. Such a sentence typically means that offend-
ers will spend the rest of their lives behind bars if they are not, in exceptional
cases, commuted or receive executive pardon (van Zyl Smit, 2002; Wright,
1990). While life-with-parole sentence is also referred to as “reducible,”
LWOP is considered “irreducible” (van Zyl Smit, 2010).
Most Western industrialized countries which allow for a life sentence as a
penalty option for punishing criminal offenders typically impose these sen-
tences on those convicted of the most heinous crimes, especially of first
degree murder (van Zyl Smit, 2002). As such, life sentences constitute the
harshest punishment available for criminal offenders in these countries. In
the United States, life sentences, especially the LWOP version, have initially
been considered a “more humane” alternative to the death penalty (Johnson
& McGunigall-Smith, 2008; Wright, 1990). However, fueled by the increased
punitiveness of the American criminal justice system, life sentences have
since become more widely. They are now more frequently imposed on
offenders convicted of violent felonies other than murder as well as on repeat
offenders who have not necessarily been convicted of violent crimes.
Housing lifers in prisons does have important implications (Cheatwood,
1988; Wright, 1990; Gottschalk, 2012). With more offenders sentenced to
life, the character of the overall prison population changes. With lifers being
“long-term prisoners,” there is fewer turnovers of inmates (Porporino, 1990).
Meanwhile, the prison population will get older, as the lifers will spend a
significant portion of their lives, if not even the rest of their lives, behind
bars. This leads to not only higher correctional costs for housing these long-
term inmates but also eventually to higher medical and geriatric expenses.
In three separate research reports, which addressed the alarming growth of
the U.S. lifer population and its implications,, the Sentencing Project identified
Alabama as a state with a particularly high percentage of lifers in its total prison
population (Mauer, King, & Young, 2004; Nellis, 2013; Nellis & King, 2009).2
Based on the Sentencing Project’s findings and the availability of detailed sta-
tistical data on lifetime incarcerated offenders in Alabama collected by the
state’s Department of Corrections, Alabama serves as a case study for this
research. By applying the theoretical framework of incapacitation, the goal of

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT