Culpability
From the Abstract: “Modern doctrine and scholarship largely take it for granted that offenders should be criminally punished for reckless acts. Yet, developments in our understanding of human behavior can shed light on how we define and attribute criminal liability, or at least force us to grapple with the categories that have existed for so…
From the introduction: ” Recent Supreme Court cases have recognized the science underlying the common-sense notion that children are not “little adults.” Their brains function in a completely different manner than those of adults. In 2005, the Court abolished the juvenile death penalty and recognized the neuroscience underlying the claim that those under the age…
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…
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 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 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…
This amicus brief by The Juvenile Law Center and The Gault Center wrote the amicus, urging the Supreme Court to Grant Certiorari in the case of Bunch v. Bobby. This brief argues that juvenile life without parole sentences are unconstitutional for non-homicide offenses as articulated in Graham must be applied to sentences that are the…
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 and The Gault Center argues Illinois automatic transfer law does not comply with recent research and findings on adolescent development as recognized by the Supreme Court jurisprudence in Roper and Graham. Further, amici argue the state’s automatic transfer statute violates the proportionality clause of Article I, Section 11…
This amicus brief by Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, Juvenile Law Center, and others argues that a juvenile court adjudication should not be used to enhance a sentence in adult court under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), because a juvenile court adjudication lacks the same reliability as a criminal conviction, and…
This amicus brief by The Gault Center, Children’s Law Center, Inc., and the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation, Inc. argues mandating young people to register on sex offender registries is improper since youth adjudicated of sex offenses are vastly different from adults convicted of sex offenses, registries frustrate the purpose of juvenile court,…
This amicus brief by The Gault Center, Juvenile Law Center, and National Center for Lesbian Rights argue that strict liability statutes run counter to the principles of adolescent development. Here, amici argue that a 12-year old child who engaged in non-forcible sexual conduct with his peer, who was then prosecuted under a strict liability sex…
The U.S. Supreme Court held juvenile life without parole for non-homicide offenses violates the 8th Amendment and offered the following language in support. “Roper established that because juveniles have lessened culpability they are less deserving of the most severe punishments. 543 U.S., at 569, 125 S. Ct. 1183, 161 L. Ed. 2d 1. As compared…
The American Psychological Association’s (APA’s) stance on the psychological maturity of adolescents has been criticized as inconsistent. In its Supreme Court amicus brief in Roper v. Simmons (2005), which abolished the juvenile death penalty, APA described adolescents as developmentally immature. In its amicus brief in Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990), however, which upheld adolescents’ right to…
This amicus brief by The Juvenile Law Center, The Gault Center, and others highlights the unique developmental status of youth, relevant social science research, and Supreme Court Jurisprudence, that make a life without parole sentence for non-homicide crimes unconstitutional in violation of the 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As stated in their brief: “The…
“Prior research describes the development of susceptibility to peer pressure in adolescence as following an inverted U-shaped curve, increasing during early adolescence, peaking around age 14, and declining thereafter. This pattern, however, is derived mainly from studies that specifically examined peer pressure to engage in antisocial behavior. In the present study, age differences and developmental…
The delinquent act itself is often the primary basis for determining intention and competency of children under 18 in adult or juvenile court. But behaviors result from one or more of a diverse range of factors, each of which has different effects on decision-making. The capacity of juveniles to plan or to stop an action…
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
