[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6204616,"mediaKeyId","3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7","parentId",3778570,"title","Committee hears competing testimony on bills to change resentencing for 19–20‑year‑olds; prosecutors, victims and defenders clash","audioSeconds",2617,"startMs",1777000,"endMs",4394000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7&start=1777&end=4394","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7/thumbnail_1777000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6204616/Michigan/Committee-hears-competing-testimony-on-bills-to-change-resentencing-for-1920yearolds-prosecutors-victims-and-defenders-clash","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6204616-adc027babcae7109f548e83cf6fa22dd/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185388&Signature=jT~kX5DBAJE3ghUnvbF2l23GsKMdelJnOhjaRkTjAoUZS3sSOWzGXIP~19X0nkaY1CwSeWvK6GJh3X7-rB~HR01Mq-~uJN3FTmoYrC6YdIeIO1GbqQzwnKYdFH7Lri7HgH9L5coIQuRZ8CvTWzUnhbOUzgrlcbEsb49jId4WixXR9Or6X6CEyvZdsGdk~JgOfhQvFc3361Dxa1YwAoAQfz1ZIL8hYZngaHLRYLl7Im~O9pzBb8FQR2c3BMQepvviWXBXDJIh25tp5VNDwDZdybn25th6hEmlUnT2g-kjgpnjlkJgkRvlkXxfyTmNpd5xD3pf4THttvqMWD~B-IN2gw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Michigan Legislature","date","2025-06-12T04:18:59.86Z","article","Representative Lightner introduced House Bills 4506, 4507 and 4508, a package aimed at modifying resentencing procedures for individuals who committed degree murder at ages 19 and 20 and who are subject to resentencing following recent court decisions.

Kalamazoo County Prosecuting Attorney Jeff Gedding, speaking on behalf of the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan, said proponents want to preserve life without parole as an available sentencing option in appropriate cases, to provide realistic timeframes for prosecutors to decide when to seek life without parole, and to permit consecutive sentences when multiple victims are involved. \"This package of bills continues, that as an option,\" he told the committee, and he argued the bills center victims and prioritize proportionality for heinous offenses. Gedding said the statutes should allow minimum terms in the 35–50 year range and maximums that begin at 80 years in cases where life without parole is not imposed.

Representative Hope and other members raised constitutional questions and policy concerns on the record. Maya Menlo of the State Appellate Defender Office (SADO) and the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan argued the bills raise constitutional problems, citing United States Supreme Court precedents (Roper, Miller, Montgomery) and Michigan Supreme Court opinions (Czarnecki and Taylor). Menlo said the constitution requires individualized sentencing that considers youth and that a statutory floor of 35–50 years could amount to a de facto life sentence for many younger offenders. She also warned of equal‑protection, separation‑of‑powers and ex post facto concerns that could invite prolonged litigation and delay resentencings.

Several victims and victims’ advocates testified in support of the bills. Roberta Gartley described the murder of her son and argued that age should not shield violent offenders from the most severe penalties. Prosecutors and victims' advocates stressed the need to recognize multiple victims when multiple homicides occur and to avoid concurrent sentencing that they said can undercount harm to victims.

Joshua Puckett, who identified himself as a formerly incarcerated person and the director of Adolescent Redemptive and Restorative Programs, opposed the bills and urged preserving judicial discretion for individualized review and rehabilitation, saying in part, \"This bill would take away those judges' discretion to utilize their power.\" He described his own long incarceration and post‑release rehabilitation as evidence that some people convicted as young adults can be rehabilitated.

Committee members also heard from a range of organizations listed on the public record: ACLU of Michigan, Michigan Collaborative to End Mass Incarceration, Citizens for Prison Reform, Safe & Just Michigan, Life After '27, Michigan League for Public Policy and others opposing the bills or urging caution.

Representative Leitner said the committee will continue discussion and expects further work; no formal committee vote on the resentencing bills was recorded in the transcript excerpt.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Judiciary - 6/11/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The House Judiciary Committee heard competing testimony on House Bills 4506–4508, which would alter resentencing procedures for people who committed degree murder at ages 19 and 20.","taxTitle","2025 House Legislature MI, Michigan","taxId",77683,"location","Michigan","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6204620,"Committee hears proposal to restore older property restrictions; stakeholders say bill reconciles 2018 changes",711,1068000,1779000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7&start=1068&end=1779","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7/thumbnail_1068000.jpg","/articles/6204620/Michigan/Committee-hears-proposal-to-restore-older-property-restrictions-stakeholders-say-bill-reconciles-2018-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6204620-a3857adce7a217e2827f5828c7dc50ee/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185388&Signature=InElvLGAWduyC6fAbgaGLZWg2jk~FQRRSOBtXU9FbrIbuKoW8Wsw6HdnYQqcEcwiVcRlV4vSUOtHrClaCnlEAQi6ByN6j42WpjOzOSIRZJc4BAHSWJvL7TUPg6HWxRA8vPzg6eBWJxMHxxLPoKQB2ohoZypyIc3keUBpeQMr3RrLbTwDU8TPVCglpvkHYmc-t5vfDRc2MZCu0Hw68AY9AJlzxiDhO01SVHiBvVxdCLmSaEZggWOpo3WLK5679mQxrHDhO6yF9Akz-8~A6KR8w7ViwPGcFQkArMkDvUm-fYUHQB2MRgaDZ~RaPCnnxVgzkL4lWOj5-CynsunXG-~zyg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Wozniak introduced House Bill 4524 and said stakeholders had largely agreed on language to resolve long-running title issues created by the 2018 amendments to the Marketable Record Title Act.

David Pearson of the Real Property Law Section told the committee that the Marketable Record Title Act (created in 1945) was designed to simplify title searches by limiting the chain of title to 40 years, but that industry practice of broad “proviso subject to” language had raised uncertainty about whether older restrictions remained enforceable. Pearson said the 2018 amendments required specific recording references to preserve older interests and produced a two‑year grace period for notices of claim; as a result, many stakeholders believed valuable restrictions and easements (including subdivision restrictions, common‑area arrangements and commercial easements) had fallen away.

Pearson described HB4524 as a clarification that restores practical expectations: \"All this bill does is clarify some of that language to make clear that in effect, if you have an easement that's old, you still have an easement,\" he said. He told the committee the bill preserves restrictions recorded up to 75 years ago — effectively those recorded since Jan. 1, 1950 — and does not differentiate between residential and commercial interests.

Emily Dagnostini, appearing by Zoom, said stakeholders have been extending the effective date and negotiating fixes since passage of the 2018 amendments. She said the legislature has repeatedly delayed the amendments' effective date and that the current extension runs out in September; proponents hope the presently negotiated bill will avoid another extension.

Representative DeBoer asked for clarification whether the 40‑year rule for ownership/title remained; proponents confirmed the 40‑year marketable‑title provision remained in effect for ownership but that recorded deed restrictions and easements might reach back further under the bill and under the statute's notice provisions. Pearson and Dagnostini said there is a two‑year grace period in the statute for filing notices of claim for older interests if necessary.

Supporters present on the record included the Real Property Law Section, Michigan Realtors and the Community Association Institute — Michigan chapter. Committee members said they anticipated a substitute and further committee work before returning the bill to the floor.","Representative Wozniak and representatives of the Real Property Law Section and trade groups testified in support of House Bill 4524, a bill intended to clarify and preserve certain pre-1950 recorded property restrictions affected by 2018 amendments to the Marketable Record Title Act.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6204624,"Committee reports three bills out of Judiciary committee; vote totals recorded",180,891000,1071000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7&start=891&end=1071","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7/thumbnail_891000.jpg","/articles/6204624/Michigan/Committee-reports-three-bills-out-of-Judiciary-committee-vote-totals-recorded","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6204624-e589780a3f3757f07c2cfa161bbef737/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185388&Signature=YJ~SVsbFI0QyvhSFw85yV~J2Rc8ELAULwsNxzBVAkTYPGqixRMxvVJ5-Cf6--kBya4q22De6Rsjkx2nRhaPkwrS7iVsoZ0Yna79dYGZ2jCkjmWHULGFroKv4ITKA5XsXChpQ0m1o0fgTIzgghSG-PtHdga~7oYoL9zEGY9q2l~~yiZLp81Z7OQMww1vCMW5SBdzdMV0pEwld1GdCECZwARgYQt4z7UcPbs1CxW3pezQJtGFwBNP9Wch9kSdhzgAZ8I7iX7Hd1~t1VkpK95kEk0il-pMFOpTY6dJolDi3UEACJykBTxX-lJooO6gOMzF3AVspM-gtwIf~YsX6DzhdIQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Michigan House Judiciary Committee on the morning of the hearing recorded committee votes on three bills, reporting each with recommendation for further consideration.

House Bill 4396, a data-sharing bill, was moved with recommendation and approved on a roll call. Chair Leitner announced the result as 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 passes; the bill was reported with recommendation.

The committee considered House Bill 4418 with an H-2 substitute. Representative Wozniak moved adoption of the substitute and the substitute was adopted on a roll call. The committee then voted on the substituted bill; Chair Leitner announced the result as 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 passes, and reported House Bill 4418 with recommendation of substitute H-2.

House Bill 4419 was also moved with recommendation and passed on roll call. Chair Leitner announced the result as 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 passes; the motion prevailed and the bill was reported with recommendation.

Those votes were recorded on the committee floor during the meeting before the committee moved on to additional agenda items and public testimony.","The Michigan House Judiciary Committee voted to report three bills with recommendation, including a data-sharing measure and two bills with substitute language. Vote tallies were recorded on the committee floor.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6204611,"Committee hears bill to let MDOC provide reentry supports to resentenced individuals discharged immediately",642,4368000,5010000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7&start=4368&end=5010","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3778570-bcbab221b2f54e43d8369bc9221135b7/thumbnail_4368000.jpg","/articles/6204611/Michigan/Committee-hears-bill-to-let-MDOC-provide-reentry-supports-to-resentenced-individuals-discharged-immediately","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6204611-61209c664835f30b710d0d44c75a5530/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185388&Signature=Iydd~fD98s-4qY~v4FeQ-SsllnBwYRfFSPPERuDitv0Cs3cMgQ~sbWDOyx~WjUz0NO1VMpyiSiZO704hXC6HFtv0u7KTbyEgOHWpj3saYN4vzxHNBBYLBOhvJGGLRnL0gVJwH~jK6XYpR8WMp0TQEd5SmhFdETHmG46BxaYOIGsCzP1mk~BSr5~tVWvDPX-r5EpEY0gu99YXtfwKBN69wsRu-lgSLIMxeeruI8NJjJqnp-DQzXgixFYhDiWj7~Mu1nCDhSUfJs~PFKGAnqvmopnKgZaQpe9Bk847gzthgwrftGVYHiUoGQ1CHqXMb-2Ow94jeybW7brrkCzEvBOa2g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Mary Frank, legislative director for Representative Amos O'Neil, introduced House Bill 4211, explaining the bill would allow the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) to provide reentry services to individuals who, after resentencing, are immediately discharged from custody rather than remaining under MDOC jurisdiction.

Kyle Kaminski of the MDOC testified the department supports the bill because it permits MDOC to apply existing reentry infrastructure to a group of cases it cannot currently serve: people who are processed for immediate discharge following resentencing. Kaminski said MDOC is not requesting additional funds and would use existing reentry resources and community partners to provide IDs, birth certificates, transitional housing and other supports to reduce the risks posed by immediate discharge.

Angie Sprank of West Central Michigan Works described a regional program that has provided wraparound reentry services to resentenced juvenile lifers and reported that, of ten individuals assisted through that program, nine remained successful in the community (one subsequently died). She said many of these individuals lack family supports and basic administrative documents after decades in prison and that providing reentry services makes communities safer and reduces strain on local services.

Priscilla Bordeo of Crime Survivors for Safety and Justice also supported the bill, saying victims want safe transitions and that MDOC assistance with ID, housing and medical care can help people return to the community with supports that reduce recidivism.

Committee members thanked witnesses and moved on to other agenda items; no committee vote on HB4211 appeared in the transcript excerpt.","House Bill 4211 would authorize the Michigan Department of Corrections to provide reentry services (IDs, vital records, transitional housing and related supports) to a subset of resentenced individuals who are immediately discharged following resentencing. MDOC and local reentry partners testified in support.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears competing testimony on bills to change resentencing for 19–20‑year‑olds; prosecutors, victims and defenders clash

Committee hears proposal to restore older property restrictions; stakeholders say bill reconciles 2018 changes

Committee reports three bills out of Judiciary committee; vote totals recorded

Committee hears bill to let MDOC provide reentry supports to resentenced individuals discharged immediately