Summary of Argument

This Court should hold that young adults like Mr. Poole cannot be sentenced to a mandatory sentence of life without parole. In other words, the Court should extend the rule of Miller v Alabama, 567 US 460 (2012), to young adults. The Court should do so under article 1, section 16 of the Michigan Constitution, which sweeps more broadly than the federal Eighth Amendment. Whereas the Eighth Amendment prohibits penalties only if they are both “cruel and unusual,” US Const amend VIII, this state’s Constitution forbids any punishment that is either “cruel or unusual,” Mich Const 1963, art 1, § 16. As this Court repeatedly has recognized, that linguistic difference has real bite and commands a broader interpretation of the Michigan Constitution as compared to the federal Eighth Amendment. A sentence may violate the Michigan Constitution based on cruelty alone, regardless of whether the penalty is usual or unusual. That difference matters here because mandatory life-without-parole sentences for young adults are cruel, as the defendant’s supplemental brief amply demonstrates, see pp 11-21, 35-36. The cruelty of such sentences means that they violate the Michigan Constitution.

While the text of the Michigan Constitution does not define “cruel,” the debates at the 1850 Constitutional Convention shed light on the meaning of the term. The Constitution of 1850 adopted the current wording of article 1, section 16; every subsequent Michigan Constitution has followed suit. The 1850 debates make it clear that the delegates believed that a punishment could be cruel if it disregarded the possibility of reformation. A mandatory life without parole sentence for young people is cruel in precisely this way: Such a sentence automatically disregards the possibility of reform, even though youth increases the chance that a defendant is capable of reform.

Extending the rule of Miller to young adults would align this Court with the growing recognition among state high courts that they must pick up where the federal courts have left off in their interpretation of the federal Eighth Amendment, particularly when it comes to sentencing youthful defendants. State supreme courts like this one are the ultimate arbiters of their state’s own foundational documents. They must not hesitate to go beyond the federal Constitution where their own constitutions demand that they do so.

Summary of Argument

This article argues that mandatory life without parole sentences for young adults violate the Michigan Constitution's prohibition against cruel punishments. Unlike the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits both "cruel and unusual" punishments, the Michigan Constitution prohibits "cruel or unusual" punishments (Mich Const 1963, art 1, § 16). This distinction allows for a broader interpretation of cruelty under Michigan law.

Cruelty of Mandatory Life Sentences for Young Adults

Mandatory life without parole sentences for young adults are cruel because they disregard the possibility of reformation. The 1850 Constitutional Convention debates indicate that the delegates considered punishments that ignored the potential for rehabilitation to be cruel. Youthful offenders have a greater capacity for reform, yet mandatory life sentences automatically preclude this possibility.

Extension of Miller v. Alabama

The article advocates for extending the rule of Miller v. Alabama (2012), which held that mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment, to young adults. The growing recognition among state high courts of the need to protect youthful defendants from excessive punishments supports this extension.

Role of State Supreme Courts

State supreme courts have a duty to interpret their state constitutions independently of the federal Constitution. In this case, the Michigan Supreme Court should go beyond the Eighth Amendment and hold that mandatory life without parole sentences for young adults violate the Michigan Constitution's prohibition against cruel punishments.

Summary

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Michigan's Constitution protects against punishments that are either cruel or unusual. Unlike the federal Constitution, which requires both, Michigan's Constitution prohibits cruel punishments regardless of how common they may be.

Mandatory Life Sentences for Young Adults

Sentencing young adults to life in prison without the possibility of parole is cruel. It ignores the fact that young people have a greater chance of rehabilitation than adults.

The 1850 Constitutional Convention

When Michigan's Constitution was written in 1850, delegates believed that punishments should not disregard the possibility of reformation. Mandatory life sentences for young adults do exactly that.

State Courts Stepping Up

State supreme courts are recognizing the need to protect youthful defendants from overly harsh sentences. They are interpreting their state constitutions to provide greater protections than the federal Constitution.

Conclusion

Michigan's Supreme Court should extend the rule of Miller v. Alabama to young adults. This would prohibit mandatory life-without-parole sentences for this group and ensure that their potential for rehabilitation is considered.

Summary

The Problem:

Young adults like Mr. Poole are being sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. This is cruel because it doesn't give them a chance to change and become better people.

The Solution:

The Michigan Constitution says that punishments can't be cruel. Life sentences without parole for young adults are cruel because they ignore the fact that young people have a better chance of changing for the better.

Why It Matters:

The Michigan Constitution is different from the U.S. Constitution. It protects people from cruel punishments, even if those punishments are common.

What the Court Should Do:

The Court should extend the rule from a previous case called Miller v Alabama to young adults. This rule says that young people can't be sentenced to life without parole.

Other States Are Doing It:

Other state courts are recognizing that young people deserve a second chance. Michigan should join them and protect young adults from cruel and unusual punishment.

Summary

What the Court Should Do

The court should say that young adults should not have to spend the rest of their lives in prison without the chance to get out. This is because it is cruel to punish them this way.

Why It's Cruel

When young people get life in prison without parole, it means they will never have a chance to change and become better people. But young people are more likely to change than older people. So, it's cruel to lock them up forever without giving them a chance to show that they can be good citizens.

What Other States Are Doing

Many other states have already decided that young adults should not get life in prison without parole. It's time for our state to do the same. Our state constitution says that punishments should not be cruel, and this punishment is definitely cruel.