Resource Library

Topics

Filters

Clear Filters

Resource Library

New to the Resource Library?

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

How to use the Library

Commonwealth v. Sharma

The court ruled a juvenile convicted of second-degree murder was not entitled to automatic resentencing under new laws. His life sentence was not cruel, but the original judge should have considered his age and rehabilitation.

youth convicted of second degree murderjuvenile second degree murder convictionretroactive application of lawMiller v. Alabamasecond-degree murderjuvenile offenderpotential for rehabilitation

State v. McDougald

The court denied McDougald's appeal to reduce his life sentence. Changes in sentencing laws do not retroactively apply to his past violent felony convictions, thus his original sentence stands.

North Carolina criminal lawLWOPretroactive application of sentencing law juvenile life without parole

People v. Matias

An appeals court upheld a murder sentence for a defendant convicted at 16. The court found the original judge considered his age, and the sentence was within legal limits.

history of youth sentencingblack and brown youthraceLWOPjuvenile life without paroleage at crimecruel and unusual punishment

State of Ohio v. Graham

The court upheld a life sentence without parole for a 21-year-old convicted of aggravated murder. His requests to represent himself were unclear, and his age did not violate constitutional protections.

LWOPblack youthJLWOPlife without parolejuvenile life without parole

In re Williams

The Washington Supreme Court denied a prisoner's petition challenging COVID-19 confinement conditions. The Court found the state's efforts to mitigate the virus were sufficient and the conditions did not violate constitutional rights.

Washington State ConstitutionEighth Amendment (U.S.)cruel and unusual punishmentCOVID-19prison conditionsrisk of infectionpersonal restraint petition

Lee Boyd Malvo v. State of Maryland

The court ruled Malvo's life-without-parole sentences, imposed as a 17-year-old, should be reevaluated. This reflects Supreme Court changes requiring youth and rehabilitation potential to be considered in juvenile sentencing.

homicidecruel and unusual punishmentjuvenile sentencingjuvenile offenderEighth Amendment (U.S.)

State v. Ali

The Minnesota Supreme Court found that consecutive life sentences for a juvenile are not the same as life without parole. The Court declined to extend federal precedent that restricts juvenile life without parole.

juvenile offenders multiple offenses during a single criminal episodeconsecutive sentencesproportionality principlejuvenile sentencingEighth Amendment (U.S.)

Commonwealth v. Romanelli

A juvenile offender initially sentenced to life without parole for murder appealed his resentencing. The court found the lower court failed to consider rehabilitation potential, vacating the sentence and remanding the case.

LWOPjuvenile life without parolemandatory minimum sentencesrehabilitation potentialresentencing

State v. Diaz

The court upheld a juvenile's transfer to adult court for assault but ordered a hearing on whether Miranda rights were knowingly waived before her statements to police.

potential for rehabilitation of youthLWOPjuvenile life without paroleMiranda rightsjuvenile transferaggravated assault

Kelsey v. State

The Florida Supreme Court ruled that a ban on life sentences for juvenile non-homicide offenders applied retroactively. However, the Court found Kelsey's resentenced term of years to be appropriate given his crimes.

juvenile offenderLWOPresentencingretroactive applicationGraham v. Floridajuvenile life without parole

Commonwealth v. Jones

The court held that mandatory life sentences for juveniles are unconstitutional. It ordered a new sentencing hearing for Jones, who was sentenced as a juvenile, to consider his youth and rehabilitation potential.

LWOPjuvenile justicejuvenile offender post-conviciton reliefretroactive application of MillerMiller v. Alabamarehabilitation potential of juvenilesEighth Amendment (U.S.)

Vasquez v. Virginia

The Virginia Supreme Court upheld a lengthy sentence for a juvenile offender's felonies. The court ruled the sentence was not cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.

juvenile offendergeriatric releaseLWOPcruel and unusual punishmentEighth Amendment (U.S.)

Commonwealth v. Phillips

The court found a juvenile's life sentence without parole was untimely challenged. Although mandatory juvenile life sentences are unconstitutional, this ruling did not automatically apply to Phillips's old case.

Miller v. Alabamaretroactive application of MillerLWOPjuvenile life without paroleresentencing of juvenile offendersPennsylvania Post-Conviction Relief Act (PCRA)

State v. Long

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that juvenile life without parole sentences require courts to consider youth and rehabilitation potential. This partially affirmed a juvenile offender's challenge to his sentence for multiple murders.

juvenile offender sentencingjuvenile life without paroleLWOPEighth Amendment (U.S.)proportionality principleMiller v. Alabamaresentencingrehabilitation potential of youth

Moore v. Gwathney

A federal case argues Alabama's parole board makes release impossible for people sentenced as juveniles to life without parole. The plaintiffs seek a court order for a meaningful chance at parole.

LWOPjuvenile life without paroleEighth Amendment (U.S.)cruel and unusual punishmentmeaningful opportunity for parolejuvenile resentencing
1...515253...62