The case of People v. Hyatt (2018) centered around the sentencing of Kenya Hyatt, a juvenile tried under Michigan's felony murder statute. This statute allows for murder charges against any individual complicit in a felony resulting in death, irrespective of their direct role in the fatality. Hyatt, a 17-year-old at the time of the crime, contested the mandatory life sentence without parole, arguing its incongruence with the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.

This case drew significant precedent from Miller v. Alabama (2012), a landmark Supreme Court ruling that deemed mandatory life sentences for minors without consideration of rehabilitative potential unconstitutional. People v. Hyatt sought to determine if the application of Michigan's felony murder statute to juvenile offenders, specifically concerning mandatory life sentences, aligned with the Miller v. Alabama decision.

The case of People v. Hyatt (2018) centered around Kenya Hyatt, a teenager who, at 17 years old, received a life sentence without the possibility of parole under Michigan law. This severe punishment stemmed from Hyatt's involvement in a crime categorized as "felony murder." Felony murder, in simple terms, means that anyone participating in a felony that results in someone's death can be charged with murder, even if they weren't the direct cause of the death. Hyatt's legal team argued that issuing a mandatory life sentence to a 17-year-old accomplice was a violation of the Eighth Amendment's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment."

This case relied heavily on a landmark Supreme Court decision, Miller v. Alabama (2012). In Miller, the Court ruled against mandatory life sentences for minors without taking into account their individual potential for rehabilitation. People v. Hyatt essentially questioned whether Michigan's felony murder statute, when applied to underage offenders, aligned with the precedent set by Miller v. Alabama.

In 2018, a teenager named Kenya Hyatt fought against a Michigan law that gave him a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Hyatt was 17 years old when he was involved in a robbery where someone died. Even though he didn't directly cause the death, Michigan's "felony murder" law meant that anyone involved in a serious crime like robbery that ends in death gets charged with murder, regardless of whether they intended for someone to die. Hyatt argued that giving a 17-year-old a life sentence with no chance of release, just for being an accomplice, was way too harsh and went against the Constitution's protection against "cruel and unusual punishment."

This case built upon an important Supreme Court ruling from 2012 called Miller v. Alabama. In that case, the Court said it's unconstitutional to automatically sentence juveniles to life without parole; judges must consider if the young person has potential for rehabilitation and change. People v. Hyatt examined if Michigan's felony murder law, when used against young offenders, followed this important rule.

In 2018, a teenager named Kenya Hyatt was given a very serious sentence – life in prison without the chance of ever getting out. He was given this sentence because of a law in Michigan called the "felony murder" law. This law says that if someone dies during a serious crime, everyone involved in the crime can be charged with murder, even if they didn't directly cause the death.

Hyatt said that this law, which resulted in him getting a life sentence even though he was only 17 years old at the time of the crime, was unfair. He argued that it was a "cruel and unusual punishment," which is forbidden by the US Constitution.

His case was important because it relied on a big court decision from a few years earlier. In 2012, the Supreme Court (the highest court in the US) said in Miller v. Alabama that giving automatic life sentences to teenagers without considering if they could change was wrong. Hyatt's case questioned if Michigan's felony murder law, when used against young people, followed this important decision.