Supreme Court tosses D.C. sniper case after change in Virginia law




Supreme Court tosses D.C. sniper case after change in Virginia law
Supreme Court tosses D.C. sniper case after change in Virginia law  

Washington - The Supreme Court dismissed a case involving Lee Boyd Malvo, one of the shooters who terrorized the Washington, D.C., region more than 15 years ago, after the state of Virginia changed its law regarding life-without-parole sentences for juvenile offenders.

The move came after Malvo's lawyers and the state of Virginia notified the court that they agreed to dismiss the case in light of legislation signed by Virginia Governor Ralph Northam on Monday. Malvo will not seek resentencing on his Virginia convictions but should be eligible for parole in 2022.

While the new Virginia law ends Malvo's Supreme Court case, it's unlikely he'll be released from prison anytime soon. In addition to his four life sentences in Virginia, Malvo also received six life sentences without the possibility of parole for killings in Maryland.

This photo provided by the Virginia Department of Corrections shows Lee Boyd Malvo. Virginia Department of Corrections / AP

Under the measure enacted in Virginia, people who were sentenced to life in prison for crimes committed as a juvenile and who have served at least 20 years of their sentence are eligible for parole.

Malvo received four sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole in 2004 for his role in the 2002 killing spree, during which he and John Allen Muhammad shot and killed 10 people in Maryland, Virginia and Washington. Muhammad was convicted of capital murder and executed in 2009.

Nearly a decade after Malvo received his life sentence, the Supreme Court ruled that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juvenile offenders were unconstitutional. Malvo was 17 when he and Muhammad went on their fatal shooting rampage.

A federal appeals court ruled in 2018 that while Malvo's life-without-parole sentences were legal when they were handed down, he should receive a new sentencing hearing in light of the Supreme Court's 2012 decision.

Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring appealed to the Supreme Court, and the high court agreed to hear the case last year. The justices heard oral arguments in October. Danielle Spinelli, Malvo's lawyer, said that even if he were eligible for parole, it would not mean he would automatically be released.

"It would mean that he would have the opportunity some time in the future to make the case to the parole board that he has changed," she said. "So we are nowhere near any prospect of being released."

Senator Tim Scott on the trailblazer who inspires him

Voters react to fiery Democratic debate in South Carolina

Trump to hold news conference on coronavirus as concerns grow

COMMENTS

More Related News

U.S. Supreme Court sides with GOP on Wisconsin election, apparently rewrites state election law
U.S. Supreme Court sides with GOP on Wisconsin election, apparently rewrites state election law

Wisconsin's local elections and presidential primaries will likely proceed on Tuesday after the conservative majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down an executive order Monday from Gov. Tony Evers (D) to delay the election to June 9 due to the coronavirus outbreak. There are open questions about how many polling places will be open and how many people will be able to vote by absentee ballot. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Monday night that Wisconsin voters must hand-deliver their absentee ballots by Tuesday evening or have them postmarked April 7, overruling a lower court that had extended absentee voting for six days.The U.S. Supreme Court, like the state court, split...

Political hackery at its worst: Supreme Court gives Wisconsin a green light to disenfranchise voters during the pandemic
Political hackery at its worst: Supreme Court gives Wisconsin a green light to disenfranchise voters during the pandemic

The court disenfranchises voters who are rightly afraid to vote in person because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Editorial: The U.S. Supreme Court just made it easier for police to pull you over
Editorial: The U.S. Supreme Court just made it easier for police to pull you over
  • US
  • 2020-04-06 23:16:18Z

The justices give police the OK to stop drivers with nothing more than the barest fig leaf of a reason: that the car owner's license has been revoked.

'OK, boomer!' Supreme Court hands partial victory to federal worker claiming age discrimination

The case won attention at oral argument when Chief Justice John Roberts asked whether the phrase "OK, boomer" would qualify as age discrimination.

Supreme Court rejects church challenge to ban on bus ads
Supreme Court rejects church challenge to ban on bus ads

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from a Catholic church in Washington, D.C., that sought to place religious-themed ads on public buses. The justices are leaving in place a federal appeals court ruling that found no fault with the Washington transit agency policy that banned all issue-oriented advertisements on the region's rail and bus system. The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington sought to place an ad on the outside of public buses in the fall of 2017.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Latin America