Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Brief for the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, and American Academy of Psychiatry and Law as Amici Curiae in Support of Petition for a Writ of Certiorari
The brief argues that false confessions, especially from juveniles and individuals with low intelligence, are often involuntary and contribute to wrongful convictions.
Brief for Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project, Inc. in Support of Applicant
The brief argues that eyewitness identification in this case is unreliable. This unreliability stems from factors like hypnosis, suggestive procedures, and memory contamination, according to current scientific understanding.
Brief for Amicus Curiae Fair Punishment Project in Support of Petitioner, Willbanks and Nathan
The brief argues prior rulings protecting children from life sentences should extend to lengthy, combined sentences. It asserts that children's sentences must focus on rehabilitation.
State of New Mexico's Answer Brief to Amicus Brief in Chief
This brief argues that current Supreme Court rulings on juvenile sentencing do not prohibit lengthy aggregated sentences for multiple crimes.
Motion of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, Columbia Legal Services, and Washington Defender Association for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Respondent
This brief argues that juvenile life without parole, including de facto sentences, is unconstitutional under state law. It asserts that state protections are stronger than federal law regarding juvenile sentencing.
Amici Curiae Brief of Columbia Legal Services and TeamChild
This brief argues that juvenile courts undermine rehabilitation by denying record sealing without proper hearings. Public records create unfair barriers to housing, education, and jobs, especially for youth of color.
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
The brief argues that sentencing juvenile offenders to life without parole should be rare, reserved for extreme cases. It contends North Carolina's current scheme is unconstitutional, vague, and worsens racial disparities.
Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center, Campaign for Fair Sentencing of Youth, and Juvenile Sentencing Project in Support of Defendant-Appellee Harry Sharod James
This brief argues that sentencing youth to life without parole should be rare. It requires a detailed review of age-related factors, a juvenile's home life, peer pressure, and potential for rehabilitation.
Brief for Amicus Curiae Fair Punishment Project in Support of Petitioner, Johnson
This brief argues for a categorical ban on life without parole sentences for juveniles. It contends neither courts nor experts can reliably determine if a child's crime reflects irreparable corruption.
Brief of Juvenile Law Center, Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, and Center for Law, Brain and Behavior as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellant Harrison
This brief argues that Iowa's felony murder law is unfair to juveniles like Keyon Harrison. It contends that scientific findings about youth culpability mean juveniles should not be liable under felony murder.
Brief of Juvenile Law Center Et. Al Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that the national consensus now considers individuals under 21 to have diminished culpability. It seeks to extend the ban on the death penalty to offenders under 21, citing evolving laws and brain science.
Brief of Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project, Inc. in Support of Defendant-Appellant
The Innocence Project supports reversing a conviction based on cross-racial identification. It argues scientific evidence shows a higher risk of misidentification when witnesses and defendants are of different races.
Brief of Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project
This brief argues for limiting first-time in-court stranger identifications due to scientific research on mistaken eyewitness accounts. It asserts these identifications are suggestive, lack value, and can lead to wrongful convictions.
Brief of the American Psychological Association as Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Appellant
The brief argues juries should be informed about the unreliability of cross-racial identifications. This instruction is needed because research shows own-race bias, jurors often misunderstand it, and mistaken IDs cause wrongful convictions.
Brief for Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project Supporting Petitioner-Appellant and Urging Reversal
This brief argues that Gregory Bolin’s conviction should be reversed. It asserts that the conviction relied too heavily on flawed eyewitness identification, a type of evidence often linked to wrongful convictions.