Commonwealth v. Hernandez
Jose Hernandez was initially sentenced to four mandatory life without parole (LWOP) sentences for offenses committed when he was 17 years old. Following the United States Supreme Court decisions in Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana, Mr. Hernandez’s LWOP sentences were vacated, and he was resentenced to four concurrent terms of 45 years to life.
Along with the Defender Association of Philadelphia, Juvenile Law Center acted as co-counsel for Mr. Hernandez in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, arguing that his de facto life sentence is unconstitutional under the provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution barring cruel punishments, which is broader than the Eighth Amendment.
On December 12, 2024, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed Mr. Hernandez’s sentence and the PCRA court’s denial of his PCRA petition. While the Court acknowledged that Mr. Hernandez will be 62 years old when he is eligible for parole — at which time he will have spent 45 years in prison — the Court concluded that his aggregate sentence of 45 years to life does not constitute a de facto life without parole sentence. Looking to Jones and Felder, the Court reasoned that Mr. Hernandez received the protections required under the Eighth Amendment. Additionally, despite evidence that Pennsylvania’s Constitution provides broader protections than the Eight Amendment, relying on Commonwealth v. Elia, 83 A.3d 254, (Pa. Super. 2013), the Court applied Article I, Section 13 of the Pennsylvania Constitution coextensively with the Eighth Amendment. The Court held that Mr. Hernandez was not entitled to relief.
On January 10, 2025, The Defender Association of Philadelphia and Juvenile Law Center filed a Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Superior Court to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Our organizations seek review of whether the Pennsylvania Constitution’s bar on “cruel” punishment is broader than the United States Constitution’s bar on “cruel and unusual.” We also seek review of Mr. Hernandez’ de facto life sentence, which was “cruel” when imposed on a child who demonstrated rehabilitation.
LEGAL TEAM
Attorneys
Tiara Greene, Marsha Levick