Legal Research

"Juvenile Life Sentences to U.S. Supreme Court"

Posted by Chuck Kallendorf: "In September 2005, the Supreme Court declared the death penalty "cruel & unusual punishment" for juvenile offenders under the age of 18 and unconstitutional in Roper v. Simmons. This, the Court had said, by its "having established the propriety, and affirmed the necessity, of referring to 'the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society' to determine which punishments are so disproportionate as to be 'cruel & unusual.'"

"When a juvenile commits a heinous crime," the Court said, "the State can exact forfeiture of some of the most basic liberties, but the State cannot extinguish his life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity. While drawing the line at 18 is subject to the objections always raised against categorical rules, that is the point where society draws the line for many purposes between childhood and adulthood and the age at which the line for death eligibility ought to rest."

Last Monday, it announced that it would consider whether sentencing juveniles to life in prison terms without parole was similarly unjust. ( See Sullivan v. Florida, 08-7621 and Graham v. Florida, 08-7412 )

...

The Supreme Court has held that for convicted felons committing another, or other, felonies, that life sentences do not constitute "cruel & unusual punishment," but this hasn't been applied to juvenile offenders before. "Outside of the death-penalty context," CNN writes, "the Supreme Court has provided little recent guidance on how to treat the youngest of underage criminal defendants, and the appellate record is almost nonexistent."

Full text and active links are available at the source site listed below.

Source: Cincinnati Law Library Blog, 11 May 2009

Full post as published by Stark County Law Library Blawg on May 12, 2009 (boomark / email).