Brief of Amici Curiae Senator Angela Bryant, Senator Erica Smith-Ingram, Representative Kelly Alexander, Representative Larry Bell, Representative Jean Farmer-Butterfield, and Representative Rosa Gill et al., in Support of Defendant-Appellant
Mark Dorosin
Elizabeth Haddix
Jennifer Watson Marsh
Brent Ducharme
Allen Buansi
SimpleOriginal

Summary

The court should remand for resentencing because North Carolina' scheme for juvenile homicide offenders creates racial disparities; the existing processes and policies fall short of meeting constitutional minimums.

Share Resource

2017 | State Juristiction

Brief of Amici Curiae Senator Angela Bryant, Senator Erica Smith-Ingram, Representative Kelly Alexander, Representative Larry Bell, Representative Jean Farmer-Butterfield, and Representative Rosa Gill et al., in Support of Defendant-Appellant

Keywords juvenile homicide; racial disparity; juvenile offender; characteristics of youth; adolescent brain; immaturity; risky behavior; impulsivity; Miller; unconstitutionally vague statute
2017.5.17 Senators- Amicus Brief

Summary of Argument

The Eighth Amendment demands that juvenile offenders be sentenced in a manner that accounts for the unique characteristics of youth and reserves life without parole sentences for only the most extreme homicide cases. North Carolina's constitutionally insufficient statutory scheme regarding the sentencing of juvenile homicide offenders reinforces existing racial disparities in the state's treatment of juvenile offenders. North Carolina's sentencing scheme for juvenile offenders is unconstitutionally vague and a departure from the growing national consensus.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

This court should remand the case for resentencing due to the inherent racial disparities in North Carolina's sentencing system for juvenile homicide offenders. The current system, including its processes and policies, fails to meet the constitutionally mandated standards of fairness and equity.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

The court should remand the case for resentencing due to the racial disparities inherent in North Carolina's sentencing scheme for juvenile homicide offenders. The current system, including its processes and policies, fails to meet the constitutionally mandated standards of fairness and equity.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

The court should send the case back for a new sentencing because North Carolina's system for young people convicted of murder leads to unfair differences based on race. The current procedures and rules don't meet the basic standards required by the Constitution.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

The court should send the case back for a new sentencing because North Carolina's rules for young people who commit murder are unfair to people of color. The way things are now doesn't follow the rules of the Constitution.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

Brief of Amici Curiae Senator Angela Bryant, Senator Erica Smith-Ingram, Representative Kelly Alexander, Representative Larry Bell, Representative Jean Farmer-Butterfield, Representative Rosa Gill, Representative George Graham, Representative Mickey Michaux, Representative Amos Quick III, Representative Evelyn Terry, Representative Shelly Willingham, Professor Theodore M. Shaw, and Great Expectations in Support of Defendant-Appellant, State of North Carolina v. Harry Sharold James, No.514PA11-2 (N.C. May 17, 2017).

    Highlights

      Share your Highlights