Washington State: House Bill 1344, Emerging Adult Parole

Washington State: House Bill 1344, Emerging Adult Parole

In a state like Washington that has no functional rehabilitative motivators, House Bill 1344, Emerging Adult Parole, may be a step in a positive direction. Washington’s parole is limited in scope to juvenile offenders and sex offenses, with very few parole cases tied to a failed system from the 1970s and 80s that allowed hundreds to be simply warehoused in prison. With the movement of HB1344 in our legislative session starting January 10, 2022, many more youthful offenders can be moved to a parole system that will provide both a reduction of prison populations AND be a qualifier for meaningful rehabilitation. As brain science has expanded over the last several decades, cases before the US Supreme Court (the elimination of life sentences for juveniles), down to the Washington State Supreme Court (Personal Restraint Petition of Monschke, establishing 21 as the age of majority for culpability of crime in cases where “Life Without Parole” sentencing was given), have all agreed that those below a certain age, notably those between 18 to 21, are more impulsive and less matured and have a higher propensity for committing crimes, and should be handled differently than fully matured brains.

But those inmates grow up paying for those impulses, sometimes in the shadow of decades long exceptional sentencing, where a minute of youthful indiscretion leads to decades, or a lifetime, of imprisonment. HB1344 would move those under this youthful category to a parole system already in place for juveniles. A person at age 40 is distinctly different than at age 19, but the current design of our state’s system provides no recognition of that fact. But what if a thirty-or-forty-something grasps the true reality and gravity of their crime with maturation? For a country that demands a legal age for controlled substance usage, we seem to see the responsibility goalpost travel when it comes to crime. The brain science shows responsibility patterns are the same between an 18 year old, a 21 year old, and even for 15 and 16 year olds. Shouldn’t this also be accounted for equally in all aspects of legal findings?

HB1344 will require a younger offender to serve a statutory minimum portion of the sentence, but provide incentive room for that offender to capitalize on his maturity through positive rehabilitation. If a younger person can show significant change and qualify it to a parole board, he may be granted an opportunity at relief from the incarcerated portion of a sentence. And for a state like Washington that doesn’t do this for all categories of offender, it’s high time we start demanding the correctional system be held accountable for ensuring a quality product is being placed back into the community. Efforts like HB1344 would provide such accountability, while being backed by courts throughout the nation and tangible scientific findings.

As it stands, I know many people that entered this system as youngsters and will leave just in time to collect a social security pension they never paid into, and without a support system that was lost a lifetime ago. Is that the right answer? I suggest it isn’t. And as for victims of these offenders, remorse comes with a much heavier hand when one is old enough to understand the power of that remorse and the room to be responsible with it. Allow time to add that remorse to the benefit of your community and parole to ensure it contributes vibrantly post incarceration. Additionally, values and morality can be fostered through hard work and hope. For a system that currently replaces a young adult’s family structures with bureaucracy, it takes personal determination to learn them. HB1344 is the hope and a parole board will make sure the hard work is present.

Expanding parole is a meaningful step to fixing an expensive and failing system. Please show your support for this bill.

My Unique Dilemma

My Unique Dilemma

As of 2018, I have a little over eight years left before I go before the board of parole and potentially release back into the community. Although I’m admittedly a bit apprehensive, I do feel prepared. I’ve put in considerably effort improving myself not only psychosocially and spiritually, but also relationally. It is extremely important to me that I not impact others negatively. 

Previously, I was ludicrously self-centered, focused only on what I could get in life and out of life, with very little regard for the struggles and feelings experienced by others. Rather than positively impact the lives of others, I was hurting virtually everyone with whom I came into contact. Once I finally realized how I was affecting the people around me everyday, I was able to choose how I impacted others. It was because of this revelation that I decided to pursue a career in counseling. 

I’m currently enrolled in a Ph.D. program (having earned a Master’s degree in 2017), and by the time I go before the parole board, I will have my Ph.D. in Counseling. For my certification, however, there are some additional requirements. I must complete 300 CEUs (Continued Education Units) in counseling and log 4000 clinical hours of actual counseling. While I have met the required 300 CEUs by taking several counseling courses in addition to my degree program, I have been unable to log any clinical hours. But I do have an opportunity to do so, which presents a dilemma. 

I expect to finish my Ph.D. program by mid-2021. At that point it will be possible to transfer to another facility and participate in an alcohol & drug treatment program that will help me log my clinical hours, allowing me to secure a CADC I or II (certification) prior to going before the parole board, and, I believe, increasing my chances for release. Having my certification will also make it easier to enter the workforce with a felony conviction on my record. 

On the other hand, once I complete my Ph.D. program I could go to work in one of the industry jobs that pay around $150 per month, allowing me to save a considerable amount of money for my release, and, I believe, increasing my chances for successful re-entry into society. Money is a critically important aspect of security as I acclimate to a totally new culture — I came to prison prior even to 9/11! Being able to save around $2500 can go a long way toward helping me get established. 

My dilemma lies in the fact that I cannot do both. If I enter the A & D program in order to log my clinical hours, I will be unable to save any significant amount of money for my release. And if I go to work in a job that pays enough for me to save real money, I’ll be unable to log any of the clinical hours I need for certification. It’s a difficult decision, and I haven’t made up my mind yet. I still have a couple of years before I have to decide, but it’s still an ever-present, anxiety-producing hurdle in my path that I know is coming. I think about it often. I’d be lying if I said I don’t long for some guidance, but in prison, rehabilitative guidance simply does not exist.

Update: Yvette Louisell

Update: Yvette Louisell

We blogged about Yvette last August, and are can now report that she has been approved for work-release.

Des Moines Register story here, see text below.


For the first time in almost 28 years, convicted murderer Yvette Louisell soon will live outside the walls of prison.

The Iowa Board of Parole voted Friday to move her to an Ames work-release program, ending years of legal wrangling that overturned an earlier sentence of life without parole.

Louisell was convicted of first-degree murder in 1987 for the killing of Keith Stilwell inside his Ames home. She was a 17-year-old college student at the time of the murder.

She is one the first Iowa inmates convicted of first-degree murder as a teenager to be granted conditional parole after a 2012 Supreme Court ruling declared that mandatory life-without-parole sentences are an unconstitutional form of cruel and unusual punishment for those who committed their crimes before turning 18.

There are more than 30 Iowa inmates who fall into this category.

She has received support from church members, sentencing reform advocates and even the prosecutor who convicted her of murder. They’ve all argued that Louisell has matured during her decades as an inmate and is ready to be released.

Louisell detailed the accomplishments she has made in the 10 months since her last parole hearing on Friday via a video feed from the Iowa Correctional Facility for Women in Mitchellville. She has a leadership role with a group that prepares inmates for release, and she has taken an increasing number of supervised trips outside the prison.

On Thursday, she rode on a DART bus to the downtown Des Moines headquarters and learned how to read bus schedules and download the transit authority’s smartphone app, she said. She earned an instructional driver’s permit during a trip to an Iowa Department of Transportation licensing center.

“Ms. Louisell has done above and beyond all that has been requested of her in the last few years, and certainly the years before that,” her attorney, Gordon Allen, told the parole board. “She’s ready to move on.”

Louisell and Allen spent three years in litigation, which ultimately led a district court judge to set aside her original life-without-parole sentence and open the door for her to one day leave prison.

Her bid for a new sentence went before the Iowa Supreme Court, and the ruling set significant precedent for how Iowa judges can sentence young people convicted of first-degree murder.

Louisell’s transition to a work-release facility will not be immediate. There is a waiting list at the Ames facility, parole board chairman John Hodges said.

Promising future

Louisell had a promising future when she graduated from high school in Michigan at age 16 and accepted a full scholarship to Iowa State University, where she planned to study politics. But she drank heavily and began suffering academically. On Dec. 6, 1987, she stabbed and killed Stilwell, 40, in his Ames home.

Louisell met the older man after taking a job modeling at a local art institute where Stilwell took classes. Stilwell, who was handicapped and needed canes to walk, offered to pay the struggling college student for private modeling sessions at his home.

At her trial, Louisell testified that he cornered her with a knife and threatened to rape her one night after she decided to quit posing privately for him. Louisell claimed that she stabbed Stilwell in self-defense after struggling for control of a knife, but she also took his wallet and tried to use his credit card at a mall before her arrest.

In a 1996 interview, Louisell said that abuse she suffered as a young child played a role in her crime. She also hedged her past claim that Stilwell tried to rape her.

“It had a lot more to do with my mental state than it had to do with his actions,” Louisell told Des Moines Register reporter Thomas O’Donnell in the interview from prison. “Because of what I came out of I took him to be threatening, you know, to be almost trapping me in a way that was very familiar to me. I didn’t have the sense to realize I could just get up and walk out of this situation.”

None of Stilwell’s family members was at Friday’s parole board hearing.

No early freedom

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan wrote the majority opinion in the 2012 ruling that deemed mandatory life-without-parole sentences unconstitutional for minors. She wrote that life sentences should only be used for the “rare juvenile whose crime reflects irreparable corruption.”

In late January 2014, Story County District Court Judge James Ellefson sentenced Louisell to 25 years in prison — a move that would have allowed her to be free within days.

But the ruling was put on hold while the Iowa Supreme Court considered whether Ellefson had the authority to fashion a sentence that would release Louisell while bypassing the parole board. The seven justices unanimously overturned the lower judge’s sentence last year, ruling that decisions about the release for most young killers should be left to the parole board.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, at least two other Iowa inmates sentenced as teens to life without parole have been released.

Kristina Fetters, who was imprisoned for killing her great-aunt, was released to a Des Moines hospice facility in 2013 after she was diagnosed with inoperable breast cancer. On May 12, the parole board granted work release to Mitchell Ronek, who was convicted of killing a man at a hotel in Maquoketa in 1984.

Turbulent childhood

Louisell had a turbulent childhood growing up in a family scarred by divorce and her mother’s mental illness, according to a history of her case written in the 2015 Iowa Supreme Court ruling. Louisell accidentally took LSD and experienced hallucinations when she was only 3 years old after finding the drug in her home.

In Friday’s interview with the board, Louisell said a major factor in her crime was letting her life spiral out of control without asking for help. Prison psychologists and others helping her prepare to leave prison have taught her to set aside her own independence, she said.

“I’m a very independent person, but I know that not asking for help is a huge part of what led me down the path to committing my crime,” she said. “If I have any problems, they get dealt with at the first opportunity.”

Louisell is active in Women at the Well, a prison ministry at Mitchellville coordinated through the United Methodist Church. Finding and becoming active in a church would be one of her first priorities upon leaving prison, she said.

Louisell and Allen asked the parole board to consider granting a full parole Friday, under the condition that she move into the Butterfly Freedom House, a faith-based transitional home in Ames. But, Hodges and other board members each said they preferred a more gradual release.

Louisell will be eligible for full parole at the recommendation of her parole supervisor.