Summary of Argument

What was once surmised is now a matter of scientific consensus: the development of the human brain in critical ways is not complete in the teenage years but continues into the mid-twenties. Although medical and psychological researchers have previously theorized about the length of time it takes for the brain to fully form, previous research was postulatory in nature. The psychological and neuropsychological communities have, in just the most recent two or three years, reached more detailed and certain conclusions about the behavioral effects of continuing brain development in the late adolescent and young adulthood years.

Additionally, we are now aware that childhood and adolescent exposure to repetitive trauma; physical, emotional or sexual abuse; neglect and alcohol or other substance abuse creates further delays in brain development. Again, these are conclusions that some scientists have believed to be true in the past, or that have been supportable through “common sense” or anecdote, but that have not been consistently, empirically demonstrable until recently.

Tenets of medicine, psychology, and science are not rooted in conjecture—no matter how sensible. Rigorous study, objective testing, refinement of theories, and peer review are all necessary to transition from hypotheses to establish a consensus. This process is gradual, and it necessarily draws and builds upon previously known information. What was surmised at the time of this Court’s decision in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), can now be stated as fact: an individual in his young twenties who has experienced lifelong trauma, been subjected to extensive abuse and neglect, and engaged in substance abuse is likely to bear many of the same cognitive and emotional characteristics as the juveniles at issue in Roper.

The undersigned join as amici in this case because it appears that the state courts tasked with reviewing the constitutionality of Eric Branch’s death sentence fundamentally misunderstood (or ignored) the new science underlying Mr. Branch’s claim and accordingly denied him a crucial, individualized hearing.

Amici urge the Court to stay Mr. Branch’s scheduled execution, grant his petition for a writ of certiorari, and then use his case as a vehicle to determine that the Eighth Amendment requires individualized attention to a defendant’s age in combination with other cognitive-developmental vulnerabilities he might be able to prove with respect to whether the Eighth Amendment renders him ineligible for the death penalty.

Summary of Argument

The scientific community has reached a consensus: the human brain continues to develop significantly beyond adolescence, into the mid-twenties. While this has been theorized by medical and psychological researchers in the past, recent studies have provided more concrete and detailed evidence about the impact of this continued development on behavior in late adolescents and young adults.

Moreover, research has revealed that childhood and adolescent exposure to chronic trauma, including physical, emotional, or sexual abuse, neglect, and substance abuse, further delays brain development. While these factors have been anecdotally understood and considered by some scientists in the past, recent empirical studies have provided strong, consistent evidence to support this association.

Scientific principles require rigorous research, objective testing, refinement of theories, and peer review before hypotheses can transition to established consensus. The scientific process is gradual and relies on previous knowledge. Consequently, conclusions previously surmised in the Roper v. Simmons case, where the Supreme Court ruled against the death penalty for juveniles, can now be stated as factual: individuals in their early twenties who have experienced significant trauma, abuse, and neglect, and have engaged in substance abuse are likely to exhibit similar cognitive and emotional characteristics as the juveniles considered in Roper.

This amicus brief is submitted to highlight the state courts' apparent misunderstanding of this evolving scientific understanding in their review of Eric Branch's death sentence. These courts appear to have overlooked the crucial information regarding Mr. Branch's cognitive and developmental vulnerabilities, denying him a proper individualized hearing.

The amici urge the Court to stay Mr. Branch's execution, grant his petition for a writ of certiorari, and utilize this case to determine whether the Eighth Amendment requires individualized consideration of a defendant's age in conjunction with other cognitive and developmental vulnerabilities. This would ensure that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of individuals who are ineligible due to these factors.

Summary of Argument

Recent scientific consensus has established that human brain development continues into the mid-twenties. This finding contradicts previous assumptions that the brain fully matures during adolescence. Previously, researchers theorized about the length of brain development, but only recently have they reached more concrete conclusions regarding the impact of continued brain development on behavior in late adolescence and young adulthood.

Moreover, research has confirmed that childhood and adolescent exposure to trauma, including physical, emotional, or sexual abuse, neglect, and substance abuse, can further delay brain development. While this concept has been suggested by some scientists and supported by anecdotal evidence, it has only recently been empirically confirmed through rigorous scientific study.

Science advances through rigorous research, objective testing, refinement of theories, and peer review. The transition from hypotheses to established consensus is a gradual process that builds upon previous knowledge. Based on the current scientific understanding, an individual in their early twenties who has experienced lifelong trauma, abuse, and substance abuse is likely to share similar cognitive and emotional characteristics with the juveniles considered in the Roper v. Simmons case.

This case highlights the need for courts to consider the evolving science of brain development when evaluating the constitutionality of death sentences. The court's decision in Roper v. Simmons emphasized the diminished culpability of juveniles due to their underdeveloped brains. However, the courts reviewing Mr. Branch's case appear to have misunderstood or disregarded this crucial scientific evidence, denying him an individualized hearing.

This amicus brief urges the court to stay Mr. Branch's execution, grant his petition for a writ of certiorari, and use his case to establish that the Eighth Amendment requires courts to consider an individual's age in conjunction with other cognitive-developmental vulnerabilities when determining their eligibility for the death penalty.

Summary of Argument

The brain continues to develop into a person's mid-twenties, not just during childhood and adolescence. This is now scientifically accepted, unlike in the past when it was just a theory.

Scientists also know that early experiences like abuse, neglect, and substance use can delay brain development even further. This wasn't well-understood until recently, even though some people thought it was true.

Science requires strong evidence, not just guesses. Studies, tests, and review by other scientists are needed to prove things. The Court's decision in Roper v. Simmons (2005) was based on the best scientific knowledge at the time, but now we know more. Someone in their early twenties who has experienced trauma and substance abuse may share similar brain characteristics to the young people in the Roper case.

This case involves Eric Branch, who may have been unfairly sentenced to death. The courts didn't seem to understand the new science about brain development and its effects on young adults.

The group of people supporting Mr. Branch asks the Court to delay his execution, review his case, and consider how the Eighth Amendment protects people from cruel and unusual punishment. They believe the Court should consider someone's age and any developmental problems they might have when deciding whether they can be sentenced to death.

Summary of Argument

The brains of teenagers keep growing and changing until they are about 25 years old. Scientists used to think the brain was done growing by the time people were teenagers, but now they know that’s not true.

Scientists are also learning that when kids go through really hard things like being abused, neglected, or using drugs, their brains might take even longer to grow. They have found proof that these things can actually slow down brain development.

This is important because it means that young adults who have gone through tough times might not have the same thinking skills and emotional control as older people.

A group of experts is asking the court to consider this new information in the case of a man named Eric Branch who is facing the death penalty. They think that the court should listen carefully to Eric's story and understand how his brain development and his difficult life might have affected him.