Summary of Argument

In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) that life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders committing nonhomicide offenses violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments. The Court explained: “The juvenile should not be deprived of the opportunity to achieve maturity of judgment and self-recognition of human worth and potential. . . . Life in prison without the possibility of parole gives no chance for fulfillment outside prison walls, no chance for reconciliation with society, no hope.” Id. at 2032. Graham held that a sentence that provides no “meaningful opportunity to obtain release” is unconstitutional. Id. at 2033. Petitioner Guy V. Lucero was convicted of nonhomicide offenses that he committed as a juvenile and received a sentence of 84 years that requires him to serve 42 years before he is parole-eligible. Because Mr. Lucero’s sentence deprives him of a “meaningful opportunity to obtain release,” it is the functional equivalent of life without parole and is unconstitutional despite being labeled as a term-of-years sentence. This Court should follow the U.S. Supreme Court’s mandate in Graham and hold that Petitioner Lucero’s sentence is unconstitutional.

Summary of Argument

The Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Graham v. Florida, prohibits life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders who commit non-homicide offenses. The Court reasoned that such sentences violate the Eighth Amendment because they deprive juveniles of the opportunity to mature and demonstrate their potential for rehabilitation. In Graham, the Court held that a sentence that provides no "meaningful opportunity to obtain release" is unconstitutional. This principle applies to Mr. Lucero's case, where he received a sentence of 84 years with a 42-year parole eligibility requirement. This sentence, despite being characterized as a term-of-years sentence, effectively functions as life without parole because it deprives Mr. Lucero of a meaningful chance for release. Therefore, based on the precedent established in Graham, Mr. Lucero's sentence should be deemed unconstitutional.

Summary of Argument

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Graham v. Florida (2010) established that imposing life without parole sentences on juvenile offenders for nonhomicide offenses constitutes a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The Court reasoned that such sentences deprive juveniles of the opportunity to mature, recognize their worth, and potentially contribute to society. This deprivation, according to the Court, is unconstitutional because it offers no meaningful chance for release.

In the case of Guy V. Lucero, who was convicted of nonhomicide offenses committed as a juvenile and sentenced to 84 years with a minimum of 42 years before parole eligibility, his sentence effectively functions as life without parole, lacking any meaningful opportunity for release. The Court should follow the precedent set in Graham and declare Lucero's sentence unconstitutional.

Summary of Argument

In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that giving life sentences without the chance of parole to young people who didn't commit murder was unconstitutional. They argued that these sentences are cruel and unusual punishment because they don't allow young people to grow and change. The court stated that these sentences should give young people a chance to show they can be good citizens and rejoin society.

The case of Guy V. Lucero presents a similar situation. He was convicted of crimes he committed as a young person and sentenced to 84 years in prison, with 42 years before he could be released on parole. The court should follow the Supreme Court's decision in the Graham case and rule that Lucero's sentence is also unconstitutional because it gives him very little chance of ever being released from prison.

Summary of Argument

The Supreme Court said that giving a young person a life sentence without the chance of parole for a crime that wasn't murder is cruel and unusual punishment. They said young people need a chance to grow and change, and a life sentence takes that away. In this case, Mr. Lucero got a long sentence that means he has to spend many years in prison before he can even try to get out. The Court should say that Mr. Lucero's sentence is unfair because it is like a life sentence and it takes away his chance to get out of prison.