Adolescent Development
From the abstract: “The study of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and their negative repercussion on adult health outcomes is well documented. In a population of insured Californians, a dose-response relationship has been demonstrated among 10 ACEs and a host of chronic physical health, mental health, and behavioral outcomes. Less widely studied is the prevalence of…
The Iowa Supreme Court struck down mandatory minimum sentencing schemes as applied to a young person transferred to adult court, finding mandatory minimum sentences to be in violation of federal and state prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment and the best interest clause in Iowa’s juvenile code. The court notes “the statutory recognition of the…
From the summary: “It is critical for judicial officers, attorneys, probation officers, child welfare, and other professionals who work with youth to be knowledgeable about the impact of trauma on children’s development and on their emotional, behavioral, and cognitive functioning. Understanding trauma and the potential impacts on children who come before the juvenile and family…
This amicus brief by Juvenile Law Center, The Gault Center, and others argues Ohio’s mandatory bindover statute violates the Due Process protections guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as the mandatory scheme does not allow for individualized sentencing and recognition of the unique characteristics of youth. Further, amici argue individualized transfer proceedings…
This article, written by Mae C. Quinn and published in the N.Y.U. Review of Law and Social Change, examines the “various ways in which youthful online actions and interactions, like pubescent urban activities from decades before, are being prohibited by emerging laws and orders.” Further the article looks at our country’s “obsession of policing puberty”,…
This amici brief by Juvenile Law Center, Loyola Civitas Childlaw Clinic, and others argues automatic prosecution and mandatory sentencing of young people charged with felony murder is unconstitutional in light of recent Supreme Court case law as Illinois law does not allow for individual sentencing based on maturity and culpability. Furthemore, the brief argues the…
This amicus brief by Juvenile Law Center and others argues California Penal Code 190.5(b) is unconstitutional because it presumes life without parole is the appropriate sentence for certain young people in adult court and it disregards Miller’s requirement of individualized sentencing. Furthermore, amici argue that a young person’s sentence must provide a “meaningful opportunity to…
This amicus brief prepared by Children’s Law Center, Inc., the Office of the Ohio Public Defender, The Gault Center, and others argues that due process and fundamental fairness, pursuant to the 5th Amendment, the 14th Amendment and Ohio law, require the state to provide full discovery to a young person prior to a probable cause…
This amicus brief by Juvenile Law Center argues California’s Penal Code Sec. 190.5(b) is unconstitutional because it presumes life without parole is an appropriate sentence for [youth] and this presumption contravenes Miller’s requirement of individualized sentencing and that this type of sentence be uncommon for young people. Furthermore, amici argue any life without parole sentence…
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion when it found a 16-year old youth’s consent to a warrantless blood draw was involuntary and granted his motion to suppress. The court offered the following language in support: “We hold now that, independent of § 28-1321, the Fourth Amendment requires an…
This amicus brief by Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, The Gault Center, and others argue a 15-year-old child from South Dakota did not knowingly and intelligently waive her Miranda rights when the police failed to allow her to consult with her mother before interrogation, minimized the importance of the Miranda warnings, and did not…
From the introduction: “This report will describe, dissect, and draw lessons from Connecticut’s striking success in juvenile justice reform for other states and communities seeking similar progress. The first section details the timeline and dimensions of change in Connecticut’s juvenile justice system over the past two decades. In 1992, Connecticut routinely locked up hundreds of…
This research article from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience asks, “does the brain activity underlying the production of deception differ depending on whether or not one believes their deception can be detected? To address this question, we had participants commit a mock theft in a laboratory setting, and then interrogated them while they underwent functional MRI…
This amicus brief by the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, Vanderbilt Professor of Law and Medicine Terry A. Maroney, The Gault Center, and others. Amici argue a 16-year-old youth’s waiver of his Miranda rights was involuntary and his confession must be suppressed pursuant to the 5th and 14th Amendments, where he was threatened during…
On December 17, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice entered into a settlement agreement with Shelby County and the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County in Tennessee following their investigation into the juvenile court system. The settlement agreement includes remedial measures to align the following practices with the U.S. Constitution: probable cause determinations, notice…
On December 17, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice entered into a settlement agreement with Shelby County and the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County in Tennessee following their investigation into the juvenile court system. The settlement agreement includes remedial measures to align the following practices with the U.S. Constitution: probable cause determinations, notice…
In the case of C.P, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that R.C. 2152.86, which created a new class of youth adjudicated of sex offenses who would automatically be subject to mandatory, lifetime sex-offender registration and notification requirements, violated the U.S. and Ohio Constitutions. In its ruling, the Court offered the following language in support: “In…
This amici brief prepared by the Juvenile Law Center et al. highlights the particular characteristics of adolescent development and youth that make juvenile life without parole sentences unconstitutional and in violation of the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The brief addresses youth’s culpability, potential for change, and risk taking behavior compared to adults as…
This amicus brief by Juvenile Law Center, Campaign for Youth Justice, and The Gault Center argues the transfer hearing in the state juvenile court deprived the young person of due process when the judge only considered the intentional murder charge, when they were ultimately convicted on the lesser offense of felony murder and second degree…
This amicus brief by Juvenile Law Center, Children’s Law Center, Inc., The Gault Center, and others argues Ohio should adopt a bright line rule requiring meaningful access to counsel for all young people at the interrogation stage of a delinquency proceeding. Amici argue counsel at interrogation is essential given the developmental and neuroscientific differences between…
