Meet Nick White, a convicted killer who is wrongfully, and I would argue contrary to Supreme Court rulings, sentenced to die in prison.
The most recent chapters in White’s story occurred when a circuit court judge in Broward County, Florida, resentenced him to life in prison without parole but then, contrary to law, refused to modify that sentence.
But White’s story began long ago, before he committed murder.
Now 43 years old, White grew up in an unstable home and suffered from ADHD. He was ridiculed by teachers and struggled in school, falling behind in his lessons. He began smoking marijuana at age 12. Eventually, White found acceptance in the streets. He joined a group of other teenagers in a neighborhood gang.
At the age of 16, with the documented functioning IQ of a 12-year-old, White found himself in a protracted dispute with a rival teenage street gang. Threats were spoken, and there were confrontations. Things escalated, and both sides began carrying weapons in case things got violent. On New Year’s Eve 1994, 16-year-old White saw a car full of the other gang members parked near his house with the headlights off. Believing they were preparing to do a drive-by shooting, White approached the car. Seeing what he still believes was a gun, he shot into the car killing the driver, a straight-A student, Vikas Chander. Chander was 17 years old.
White was arrested, tried as an adult, convicted, and sentenced to life without parole. At the time White committed his crimes, that was the law. He spent the next 20 years living with the thought of dying in prison always lingering. White got into trouble mostly for drug use at the beginning of his prison sentence. He was young and had little or no positive role models. He was acting out and trying to be tough. In truth, he was stuck in a system that gave him little reason, and less opportunities, to do anything positive. Yet he overcame that.
White decided he wanted to do better. He dedicated himself to self-improvement programs and became a positive force in a very negative environment. He has been a mentor, a peer counselor, and a tutor.
Then, through a series of U.S. Supreme Court legal decisions and the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Horsley v. State in 2016, White got a chance at freedom.
The nation’s highest court mandated that all juvenile homicide offenders sentenced to life without parole be given a hearing to demonstrate whether they have changed. A hearing to give themselves a meaningful opportunity to be resentenced and at some point released from prison. A hearing, then, to judge the measure of their rehabilitation from earlier youth.
In Miller v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court said these hearings would have specific purposes. It noted that determining juveniles’ level of maturity at the time they committed their offenses should be given great weight. As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the Supreme Court’s opinion, children are different from adults in their “immaturity, recklessness, and impetuosity,” which “make them less likely to consider potential punishment.”
The Supreme Court also ruled that hearings should consider how convicts’ childhood and family life contributed to their situation. This is because children cannot remove themselves from certain situations. If they could do so, we would have fewer cases of child abuse and neglect. In Montgomery v. Louisiana the highest court also stated that “a juvenile’s character is not fully developed.” Therefore, the growth a juvenile demonstrates during incarceration should be examined by the courts.
There was no such luck for White. Broward County prosecutors and a misguided judge simply threw away what could be White’s only chance at freedom.
Recently, White was resentenced pursuant to 921.1401 of the Florida Statutes — the reformed juvenile laws. This is the hearing that is meant to occur immediately after a juvenile is found guilty of murder, either following a conviction through a trial or a plea agreement. The factors in this hearing focus on the elements of the crime and give minor consideration to other details.
During the initial resentencing phase, White’s attorney presented extensive evidence — psychological reports, expert testimony, etc., alongside testimony from White’s family and friends regarding his childhood. The prosecutor presented no evidence, relying on the victim’s family’s understandable opposing view on White’s freedom. The presiding judge reinstated a life without parole sentence.
But even as the judge made his decision during the conclusion of White’s two-day resentencing hearing on Sept. 25 last year, he said on the record that he believes White is rehabilitated. The judge also said he believes White is sincerely remorseful for his actions and is “on the right track.”
Herein lies the problem. Namely, it was contrary to the spirit of the law that the judge resentenced White to life in prison without parole. Subsequently, White filed for a review of his sentence allowed by 921.1402 of the Florida Statute — the second phase of the new and supposedly enlightened juvenile sentencing system. This hearing is intended to occur after a juvenile has served 25 years of an initial sentence and the factors are specifically focused on how, or if, a juvenile killer has developed as time has passed. White’s review hearing was held by the same judge who adjudicated the previous hearing.
Judge Martin Fein, who had no problem following the more punitive spirit of the 921.1401 Florida Statute, found numerous problems in adhering to the more merciful attitude and intent of 921.1402. At one point during the sentencing review, the judge openly marveled at the fact that the factors in the review “almost all favored the defendant.” He incredulously deemed White’s childhood abuse, ADHD, and his very low IQ a factor of “little weight.” This was astonishing. After all, these are the very things the Supreme Court weighed so important that it mandated resentencing in cases such as White’s.
To understand White’s situation, one has to know him as the adult he is today and consider him as the child he was when he committed murder. Indeed, this is what the Supreme Court demands of trial court judges who sentence juveniles for serious crimes. This is the promise given by Miller v. Alabama. White was never given the review hearing that the spirit and letter of law intended. His judge denied that.
I was present in the courtroom when Fein resentenced White to die in prison even though he said he believes White “is rehabilitated.” White, he added, is “definitely not the worst of the worst,” criteria that the Supreme Court declared reason to release a juvenile offender who has matured into a responsible adult.
Applying facts to law, I believe White should have been set free or resentenced to reflect his Fein-recognized rehabilitation. That is to say, a sentence that does not annihilate his future because of a terrible folly of long-gone youth.
White is a lot of things: a child who became a convicted murderer and a man who became a better adult. Yet above all else, he is the poster child for a lot of what is wrong with Florida’s judicial system, especially its treatment of juvenile offenders. His story is about one man, two families, his and that of Chander, the supposed evolution of society, and an unfulfilled promise.
White seeks a life outside the wire that he has more recently lived inside of it. A life of redemption, mentoring, and better deeds.
He deserves another hearing. Or, failing that, he deserves Florida Gov. Ron De Santis’s consideration of clemency.
Fein declined to comment.
Robert Lefleur works as a prison consultant.
