Resource Library

State v. Suarez

The Appellate Division ruled that the Comer decision applies only to offenders under 18. Michael Suarez, 19 at the time of his crime, is not eligible for resentencing.

Risk-Taking Facilitates Implicit Learning in Young Adults

This article examines how risk-taking can lead to learning and positive outcomes, not just negative ones. It highlights the need for more research using objective measures to understand adaptive risk-taking in adults.

Combined Effects of Social Exclusion and Social Rank Feedback on Risky Decision-Making Across Adolescence

Adolescents are more likely to take risks when peers are present or when they experience social exclusion, especially when seeking social acceptance. This behavior can be influenced by a desire to gain social status within peer groups.

People v. L.M.

The court recognized adolescents are more likely to comply with authority, so careful judicial review is needed before accepting juvenile pleas.

Differential Item Functioning in Reports of Delinquent Behavior between Black and White Youth: Evidence of Measurement Bias in Self-Reports of Arrest in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study

Differential item functioning in reports of delinquent behavior between Black and White youth: Evidence of measurement bias in self-reports of arrest in the adolescent brain cognitive development study

Self-reported youth delinquency offers valuable insights, often revealing higher rates than official records.

Prefrontal cortex structural and developmental associations with callous-unemotional traits and aggression

Early aggression and callous-unemotional traits in youth are strong risk factors for adult violence. These traits are associated with differences in brain structure, and early interventions show promise.

State v. Carter; State v. Reite

The WA Supreme Court affirmed resentencing for two 18-20-year-olds, allowing terms less than life without parole. This recognized their rehabilitation, striking only one community custody term.

State v. Abruzia

The court ruled that resentencing under Comer only applies to individuals under 18. Abruzia was 20 when he committed his crimes, making him ineligible for this resentencing.

People v. Poole

The Michigan Court of Appeals found a mandatory life sentence for an 18-year-old unconstitutional. John Poole's first-degree murder sentence was vacated, making him eligible for resentencing.

State v. Borlase

The court upheld two life sentences without parole for a defendant who murdered his parents before age 18. His youth and other factors were not considered mitigating circumstances under state law.

State v. Hauschultz

The court affirmed a juvenile's conviction, finding he was not in custody during police questioning and therefore Miranda warnings were not required. Any error in later admitting statements was harmless.

Motion of Forty Developmental Science Scholars and Nonprofits for Leave to File Amicus Brief in Support of Appellants; Brief of Amici Curiae

This brief argues that mandatory life without parole sentences for 19- and 20-year-olds are unconstitutional. It claims these individuals share the same incomplete brain development as 18-year-olds, making such sentences disproportionate.

Amicus Curiae Brief of the Center for Law, Brain, and Behavior in Support of Appellant Evan McCarrick Jerald

This brief argues a 208-year sentence for a juvenile offender is excessive. It contends adolescent brain development and capacity for change, supported by scientific evidence, warrant different sentencing considerations.

Brief of Amici Curiae American Academy of Pediatric Neuropsychology, ACLU of New Jersey, Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, the Center for Law, Brain and Behavior, Gault Center, Juvenile Law Center, Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, & Sentencing Project

This brief argues that scientific findings show late adolescents (ages 18-20) share characteristics with younger teens, warranting similar protections against extreme sentences.