Recreational marijuana has been legal in Michigan for nearly six years, and cannabis culture is thriving. Dozens of dispensaries have opened up across the city and metro Detroit more broadly. 

But even as states like Michigan bring in millions of dollars in tax revenue from legalized cannabis, thousands of people are still sitting in state and federal prisons for marijuana offenses. And, as with many issues in the American criminal justice system, racism is central to this issue.

A 2020 report by the ACLU found that more than six million marijuana arrests occurred between 2010 and 2018. And in every state — including those that have legalized marijuana — Black people are still more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than white people.

The nonprofit Last Prisoner Project is on Capitol Hill this week as part of a larger effort to lobby for justice reform. Founded in 2019, the organization works within the criminal justice system to help individuals who are still incarcerated for cannabis.

Adrian Rocha, director of policy for the project, joined The Metro on Wednesday to discuss the group’s efforts and the stark racial contrast in incarceration rates.

Use the media player above to hear the full conversation.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on-demand.

More stories from The Metro

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled Thursday that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for 19- and-20-year-old defendants violate the state Constitution.

The majority decision by a divided Supreme Court held that the sentences constitute “unconstitutionally harsh and disproportionate punishment” and will require resentencing hearings for roughly 580 prisoners convicted of murder. This follows similar decisions recently by the Supreme Court affecting inmates handed automatic life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences for crimes committed when they were 16, 17 and 18.

“Mandatorily condemning such offenders to die in prison, without first considering the attributes of youth that late adolescents and juveniles share, no longer comports with the ‘evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society,’” wrote Justice Elizabeth Welch in the majority decision, adding that violates the cruel or unusual punishment clause of the Michigan Constitution. She also wrote, “We do not foreclose the possibility that LWOP could be an appropriate punishment under rare circumstances.”

Justice Richard Bernstein wrote in a separate opinion that he would draw the line at 25 years old, based on “a consensus of relevant scientific studies.”

But Chief Justice Elizabeth Clement said the majority focused too much on the offender versus the offense.

Clement wrote in her dissent that “the majority downplays the gravity of first-degree murder.” She said, “The premeditated taking of a life is an act of the highest moral and legal consequence. A punishment of great severity is therefore proportionate.”

The cases originated in Wayne and Genesee counties. Andrew Czarnecki was 19 years old and Montario Taylor was 20 years old when they were charged with first-degree murder in separate cases. Their appeals were combined because the constitutional questions were similar.

Attorney Maya Menlo with State Appellate Defender Office said research shows young adults and older teens are very similar and the Supreme Court’s decision in these cases reflects that.

“Adolescents have brains that are not fully developed, which results in them being more reckless and also more likely to rehabilitate,” she told Michigan Public Radio. “The court adopted the scientific consensus that 19- and 20-year-olds have the same reduced culpability and the same capacity for rehabilitation as people who are 18-year-olds and younger.”

Prosecutors say the decisions are also very painful for survivors who will have to relive their loved ones’ murders in resentencing hearings.

Jon Wojtala is the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office chief of appeals. He said the decision is not a surprise, but still “a gut punch” in part because it will require survivors to relive the tragedy of the violent loss of a loved one. He said Wayne County has more than 400 cases to deal with.

“We’re going to have to hustle very, very hard to get these cases to a point of having the resentencings and when we do have the resentencings, it’s a punch to the victims’ families, to the victims’ loved ones, to have to once again be traumatized,” he told Michigan Public Radio.

Wojtala says most of the resentencing hearings will have to take place within six months. He expects the state Supreme Court decision to be the final word.

The Michigan Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments on whether the state’s felony murder sentencing standard is constitutional and what to do if it’s not.

In Michigan, people over 18 who is are of convicted of a felony such as armed robbery where someone is killed in the process are sentenced to life with no chance of parole.

In an order issued Friday, the court said the questions it will consider include whether life without parole for felony murder violates the Eighth Amendment, whether the state should require proof of malice or intent to commit murder in order to impose the sentence, and whether a decision might be applied retroactively.

The felony murder standard means prosecutors do not have to specifically prove malice or intent. If the court reverses that standard entirely or in part, it could affect the sentences of hundreds of inmates who’ve spent decades in prison.

Timothy Baughman with the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan told the Michigan Public Radio Network the challenge to that standard raises difficult questions. He said there are hundreds of inmates serving life without parole in Michigan.

“Should we overrule that and apply it to everybody who’s convicted and still in prison and alive,” said Baughman, “and some of those, they’re not like the getaway drivers, there are some very vicious murderers.”

But attorney Deborah LaBelle with the American Civil Liberties Union said some of the people convicted under the standard are not the actual killers even if they were involved in the underlying felony.

She said Michigan’s felony murder law is very sweeping in that it treats convicted killers and accomplices the same way when it comes to sentencing.

“If someone dies at the hands of someone else and you were in any way involved with the felony, the crime surrounding the homicide, you get punished the exact same way as the person who committed the murder.”

If the Supreme Court overrules its almost 50-year-old precedent, it would also have to determine the remedy.

“What should we do?” LaBelle said. “Should people be resentenced? Should there be a term of years that we determine is appropriate? How do we handle this?”

The court has not set a date for oral arguments.