Juvenile Law Center et al. Amicus Brief, J.D.B. v. North Carolina

This amicus brief by Juvenile Law Center and others argues young people are different for purposes of the Miranda custody analysis and the Supreme Court should afford young people Constitutional protections in light of Supreme Court jurisprudence on interrogations and recently under the 8th Amendment as well as social science research about the particular vulnerability of adolescent decision making and judgment. Furthermore, the brief argues that age is particularly crucial to the Miranda custody analysis during interrogations in school settings.

From the Summary of the Argument in the Brief: “In Miranda v. Arizona, this Court recognized that “rights declared in words might be lost in reality.” 384 U.S. 436, 443 (1966). Thus the Court not only stated a broad principle regarding Fifth Amendment rights, it also outlined the specific procedures needed to protect an individual from making a compelled confession. Id. Without considering the age of the suspect in a custody determination, adolescents will be effectively excluded from the protections and guarantees of the Fifth Amendment.

It is now well settled that youth status bears on legal status. The “kids are different” doctrine for the purposes of constitutional jurisprudence is a principle firmly established in the decisions of the Court. In recent years, the doctrine has been buttressed by a burgeoning body of social science and neurological research demonstrating that the differences between youth and adults are psychological and physiological, as well as social. See, e.g., Graham v. Florida, 130 S.Ct. 2011 (2010); Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). The Court has thus repeatedly recognized that to make constitutional rights a reality for youth, an adolescent’s age must be taken into account. “

The Supreme Court ultimately agreed with Amici, Holding in J.D.B. v. North Carolina, 564 U.S. 261 (2011) that “a child’s age properly informs Miranda’s custody analysis.”