Lucy Moran ’25 and Rachel Pederson ’25 Argue an Appeal before the Minnesota Court of Appeals

In June, recent graduates Lucy Moran ’25 and Rachel Pederson ’25 argued an appeal of the denial of a habeas corpus petition before the Minnesota Court of Appeals. The oral argument wrapped up a semester-long project Moran and Pederson worked on along with Kerrick Edwards '26, through their roles in Minnesota Law’s Child Advocacy and Juvenile Justice Clinic, in partnership with Professor Brad Colbert of the Mitchell Hamline School of Law’s Legal Assistance to Minnesota Prisoners (LAMP) Clinic.

The case arises from Minnesota's legislature's sweeping juvenile sentencing reform, passed in 2023. The legislation aligned the state with the constitutional demands of the Supreme Court’s decision in Miller v. Alabama, where the Court held that mandatory life without the possibility of parole for juveniles is unconstitutional, recognizing the fundamental differences between adults and juveniles. As part of the reform, Minnesota extended eligibility for supervised release to individuals serving lengthy sentences for offenses they committed as juveniles. Notably, the law also established a new supervised release review board with enhanced expertise in juvenile neurological development to review those cases. However, in the short interim period between the law’s passage and the new board’s assembly, the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections held a supervised release hearing for their client. Acting alone, the Commissioner denied supervised release and set the next supervised release hearing out ten years.

Seeking redress, the Child Advocacy and Juvenile Clinic, which regularly represents juveniles convicted of serious offenses in post-conviction proceedings, brought a petition for writ of habeas corpus in 2024, challenging the Commissioner’s authority during the interim period, and arguing the Commissioner’s decision itself violated their client’s substantive and procedural due process rights. The district court denied relief, and Moran, Pederson, and Edwards, under Professor Colbert’s supervision, appealed to the Minnesota Court of Appeals to challenge the district court’s decision and grant relief. Moran presented the principal argument, and Pederson presented the rebuttal.