By DAMIEN FISHER, InDepthNH.org
The New Hampshire Supreme Court will decide if the man convicted of murdering two Dartmouth College professors when he was 17 can be made to serve life without parole.
Grafton Superior Court Judge Lawrence MacLeod sent Robert Tulloch’s quest for a new sentence to the Supreme Court on Monday, writing the constitutional questions at stake need to be sorted out.
“[T]he court concludes that the constitutional issues in this case are significant and complex and have not yet been addressed by the New Hampshire Supreme Court,” MacLeod wrote.
Tulloch pleaded guilty in 2002 to two counts of first -degree murder for killing Half, 62, and Susanne Zantop, 55, in their Etna home the year before. Tulloch was 17 and his accomplice, James Parker, was 16, at the time of the murders.
The two Vermont high schoolers bought knives and planned to rob and kill someone, take the money, and flee to Australia. Parker and Tulloch reportedly tried to get into multiple homes before they gained entry into the Zantops’ home by pretending to conduct a survey. They were arrested weeks later in Indiana.
Parker agreed to plead guilty to second-degree murder for his role in the killings and to testify against Tulloch. He was sentenced to 25 years to life and released on parole this summer.
Tulloch ultimately opted to plead to first-degree murder, which carried an automatic life without parole sentence. He was sentenced to two life sentences set to run concurrently.
Governor-Elect Kelly Ayotte served as one of the prosecutors in the murder case. It will be under her watch that the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office argues to keep Tulloch locked up before the state Supreme Court next year. InDepthNH.org reached out to Ayotte’s senior advisor John Corbett for comment.
As Parker sought parole this year, Tulloch began seeking a new sentence. Tulloch’s lawyers, Richard Guerriero and Oliver Bloom, argue that life sentences without the possibility of parole for people who convict crimes as minors violate state and federal protections against cruel and unusual punishment. According to Tulloch’s lawyers, the 2012 ruling from the United States Supreme Court in Miller v. Alabama among other rulings make it clear juveniles cannot be locked up for life.
“[In Miller] the Court held that ‘mandatory life without parole for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment,’” Bloom and Guerriero wrote.
Article 33 of the New Hampshire Constitution further protects against juvenile life without parole, they argue. But prosecutors disagree, saying there is no specific ban on life without parole being imposed on juveniles.
Where Tulloch’s lawyers and the state agree, though, is the need for a court ruling on whether or not juveniles can be reformed before they are sentenced to life without parole. Such a finding, called “permanent incorrigibility,” requires a hearing for evidence on the character of the juvenile.
MacLeod wants the Supreme Court’s opinion here, too, to settle the rules of evidence for such incorrigibility hearings. The disagreement stems from Bloom and Guerriero arguing the state must prove Tulloch’s “permanent incorrigibility” beyond a reasonable doubt. They also argue to be allowed to present evidence on Tulloch’s post-conviction behavior in prison in order to demonstrate he can be reformed.
