This story has been updated.

Advocates, family members and friends of incarcerated individuals say it’s critical that a bill expanding eligibility for parole — the early release from prison under supervision and with certain conditions — be approved through by the Connecticut legislature before its 2025 session ends in two weeks. 

Current law allows those who have been convicted of a crime they committed between the ages of 18 and 21 to become eligible for parole after serving a portion of their sentence. People sentenced to less than 50 years may become eligible for parole after serving either 12 years or 60% of their sentence. People sentenced to more than 50 years reach eligibility after 30 years in prison. 

That only applies to crimes for which the perpetrator was sentenced before October 1, 2005. The proposed bill would extend eligibility to individuals who committed crimes between the ages of 18 and 21 on any date up to the present day. 

The bill passed through the legislature’s Judiciary Committee last month and it awaits debate in the House of Representatives. House Democratic leaders told reporters that lawmakers intend to take up the bill for debate, but that they were not sure when. The legislature’s 2025 session ends June 4.

Majority leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, told The Connecticut Mirror Thursday that the delay wasn’t over political disagreement; rather, caucus leaders were still determining which bills they wanted to prioritize. 

House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, said he didn’t expect he would be in support of the bill, but he said he couldn’t say for sure until he’d seen it.

For families of incarcerated people, the legislature’s decision can’t come soon enough.

Nicole Spears, who grew up in Meriden, told CT Mirror that the proposed legislation would help her brother, Robert Marrow. Marrow was incarcerated for a crime he committed at the age of 20, and he was sentenced in 2006. That makes him ineligible for parole under current law. 

Spears said her brother fell in with the “wrong crowd” after their parents passed away. Marrow was fourteen when their mother died from a long illness, and their father had a fatal heart attack one year later. 

“ My father died in his arms,” she said of Marrow. “They were traveling and he died at a rest stop, and my little brother was with him. It’s just, I think, hard to take,” she said. 

Spears said it’s been difficult to visit her brother at times. They’ve kept in touch through letters and phone calls, and sometimes she sends money or packages. Spears said she brought her daughter, who is now 26, to visit as a small child, but her younger son has never met his uncle.

Personal impacts

Elizabeth Hinton, a professor of history, African American studies and law at Yale, said addressing sentencing policy was key to correcting racial disparities in the criminal justice system. She estimated that about 258 people would become eligible for parole if the bill passes, 166 of whom are Black.

Hinton said she hoped Connecticut would follow the model established in California, where people who committed a crime between the ages of 18 and 25 can apply for parole at certain intervals during their incarceration. 

Hinton said granting eligibility for parole wouldn’t automatically mean people’s sentences would be reduced or that they’d be released early. Incarcerated people would still have to go before the parole board, which makes final decisions on whether to approve people for parole. 

Expanding the parole program also has positive financial impacts for the state and local communities, Hinton added. “The amount of money that Connecticut taxpayers will save is huge. If we keep all of those people in for their full sentences, that’s going to amount to hundreds of millions of dollars overtime,” she said.

Hinton recommended that the state consider how it might redirect those funds into things like education, housing access and expanded job opportunities.

Several Republican lawmakers, along with Connecticut’s Office of the Victim Advocate, opposed the bill.

Natasha Pierre, the state’s victim advocate, argued in testimony to the legislature’s Judiciary Committee in March that the state should conduct a 10-year study on the fallout of its recent criminal justice reforms before further opening up parole options.

“Reform strategies should serve not only public safety and the interests of the accused; but must serve those personally harmed by crime. The ever-changing sentencing landscape in criminal cases has had and will continue to have a detrimental impact of victims of crime,” she said in written testimony.

Many incarcerated individuals who submitted testimony in favor of the bill said that once they were incarcerated, they began taking steps to improve their lives. They took college courses and earned degrees and certifications, became involved in Alternative to Violence programs and other rehabilitative programs, and they mentored others in the prison. 

“Neighborhood notoriety is something that most kids in urban environments seek and will do abnormal things to receive. I was too immature and blind to identify any potential in myself and that made it easy for the wrong person with influence to guide me,” wrote Patrick Young, who was incarcerated at the age of 20 for assault with a sentence of 31 years. 

Maurice Blackwell, who was incarcerated for a murder he committed at age 19, was sentenced in 2002 to 60 years in prison. Under current law, he became eligible for parole and was recently released. 

Blackwell told CT Mirror that when his father died in 2003, it was an “eyeopener” for him, and he began taking advantage of more of the resources available to him in prison. He became part of the first cohort of the Yale Prison Education Initiative, which offers college classes to incarcerated individuals. He’s now a student at the University of New Haven, and says he plans to pursue a law degree.

“I thought I was a man, when I was younger,” Blackwell said, adding that his perception has changed. “I was still a child.” 

Clarification:

An earlier version of this story said current law only applies to crimes committed before October 1, 2005. The law applies to crimes for which the perpetrator was sentenced before that date.