Resource Library

Topics

Filters

Select a Year Range
Clear Filters

Resource Library

New to the Resource Library?

Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.

How to use the Library

Brief for the American Psychological Association as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellant

The brief argues that single-photograph identifications are inherently suggestive and should be presumed inadmissible. Such identifications distort memory and create a high risk of wrongful conviction.

Single-photograph identificationsinadmissibledistort memorywitness confidencewrongful convictionwitness confidencememory distortion
(2017)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality in Support of Petitioners

This brief argues that Washington's "auto-decline" law unconstitutionally forces all 16- and 17-year-olds into adult court. It claims the law denies consideration of a defendant's youth, leading to disproportionate sentences.

disproportionate sentencesjuvenile offenderssentencingyouthfulnessauto-decline statutemandatory sentencingsentence enhancementsEighth Amendment (U.S.)lesser blameworthinessdiminished culpability
(2016)

Brief of Juvenile Law Center in Support of Appellant

The brief argues a suspicionless body cavity search of a 12-year-old was unreasonable. It claims the court wrongly applied adult search standards to a child, violating her Fourth Amendment rights.

developmental differencesstrip searchbody cavity searchesminorschildrentraumaFourth Amendment (U.S.)ageadolescent vulnerabilityimmaturityexpectation of privacyFlorence
(2016)

Brief of FSU Public Interest Law Center, Juvenile Law Center, ACLU of Florida, CFFSY, The Center on Children and Families at UF, Children and Youth Law Clinic at UM, FACDL, FCF, FJRRP at FIU, et. al., as Amici Curiae on Behalf of Petitioner

The brief argues that lengthy prison sentences for juveniles deny them a chance for rehabilitation, violating their constitutional rights. It requests new sentencing guidelines for juvenile offenders under Florida law.

juvenile offendersGrahamHenryGridineMillerRoper early releaseadolescent developmentrecidivismlengthy term-of-years sentencesmeaningful opportunitymaturityrehabilitationcapacity for change
(2016)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Children’s Law Center, Inc., et al. in Support of Appellant Matthew Aalim

This brief argues that Ohio's mandatory law sending juveniles to adult court should be eliminated. It asserts that current law ignores the individual differences of youth and the purpose of the juvenile justice system.

deterrencemandatory bindoverjuvenileyouthmandatory transfersautomatic transfers to adult courtrisk of recidivismadolescent development
(2016)

Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center and National Juvenile Defender Center on Behalf of Appellant Matthew Aalim

The brief argues Ohio laws violate due process by mandating that 16- and 17-year-olds charged with certain firearm offenses be transferred to adult court without an individualized review. This denies youth their constitutional rights.

automatic transfers to adult courttransfersdue processmandatory bindoverindividualized determinationsminorsrisk of recidivismunique characteristics of youthFourteenth Amendment (U.S.) juvenilesKent v. United States
(2016)

Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center, Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates, Inc., and Professor Brandon Garrett in Support of Appellee and Affirmance

Children's confessions must be voluntary, requiring great care during questioning. Protective standards, supported by research and law, are vital to prevent false confessions, especially for children with limited cognitive abilities.

police pressurepolice interrogationspolice trainingdisabilitiesyouthfalse confessionssocial science researchvulnerability to false confessionscoercionjuvenilechild false confession
(2016)

Brief for Amici Curiae Citizens for Juvenile Justice, Committee for Public Counsel Services, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice et al., in Support of Petitioner

The brief argues mandatory life sentences for juveniles, even with parole, are unconstitutional. It claims parole offers no real chance for release, making these sentences effectively the same as life without parole.

meaningful opportunitymandatory life sentencesLWOPindividualized sentencingjuvenile offendersrehabilitation diminished culpabilityheightened rehabilitative capacityEighth Amendment (U.S.)Millermaturityunderdeveloped sense of responsibilityvulnerability to external influencepeer pressureparole board
(2016)

Brief of The Sentencing Project as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner

This brief argues that mandatory life sentences for children, even with parole, violate the Eighth Amendment. It asserts that children's immaturity makes them less culpable and undeserving of such severe punishment.

parole; childparolechildEighth Amendment (U.S.)lesser culpabilitytransfersmandatory transfers to adult courtfelony murderimmaturities of youthdiminished culpabilitychildrenmandatory life sentenceMillerinadequacy of paroletransfer statutestransfer lawsMontgomery
(2016)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Juvenile Law Center in Support of Petitioners

This brief argues that lengthy consecutive sentences for juvenile nonhomicide offenses are unconstitutional. It claims these sentences are effectively life without parole, denying a meaningful chance for release.

meaningful opportunity to obtain releaseGrahamMillerjuvenile offenderschildrennon-homicideconsecutive term-of-years sentencede facto life sentencegeriatric releasebrain sciencesentence reviewrecidivismbehavior control
(2016)

Brief of Juvenile Law Center as Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Appellant

This brief argues that a 91.5-year sentence for a juvenile's non-homicide crime is unconstitutional. It claims this sentence, with 45 years before parole, is effectively life without parole, denying a chance for release.

age-related characteristicsLWOPlife without paroleyouthmitigating factormeaningful opportunity to obtain releasede facto lifechildrenadoelscent developmentneurosciencebraindisproportionate sentencescapacity for changelong term-of-years sentences
(2016)

Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center, Center for Juvenile Law and Policy, Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, and Children’s Law Center, Inc., et al. on Behalf of Appellee Joshua Polk

This brief argues that students retain Fourth Amendment rights at school. It asserts the exclusionary rule should apply to illegal searches by school officials to prevent constitutional violations and deter misconduct.

Fourth Amendment (U.S.)exclusionary rulelaw enforcementillegal school searchesschool-to-prison-pipeline
(2016)

Brief for the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality and the Phillips Black Project as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner

This brief argues Missouri's parole process fails to provide juvenile offenders with a meaningful opportunity for release, as required by prior Supreme Court rulings. It contends the current system offers an illusory promise of freedom.

Miller factorsMillerjuvenile sentencing; parolemeaningful opportunity to obtain releaseindividualized consideration of youthmitigationmitigating factors
(2016)

Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center and Center for Law, Brain and Behavior in Support of Petitioner

This brief argues that mandatory life sentences for juveniles convicted of second-degree murder, especially under derivative liability, violate the Eighth Amendment.

joint venture theoryGrahamculpabilityblameworthinessdevelopmental attributes of youthadolescent developmentmandatory LWOPmandatory life without parolenon-homicide
(2016)

Brief for Amicus Curiae Pennsylvania Ass’n of Criminal Defense Lawyers

The brief argues that Pennsylvania's legislature never amended sentencing for juvenile first-degree murder cases from 2006, leaving an unconstitutional punishment. It asserts that the judiciary cannot assign a missing penalty.

developmental immaturityMillerMontgomerysentencingdevelopmentally appropriate sentencingfirst-degree murder
(2016)
1...141516...28