Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Current Understanding of Developmental Changes in Adolescent Perspective Taking
Adolescents continually develop perspective-taking abilities, which are crucial for forming positive relationships and mental well-being. This development involves refining advanced social skills to navigate complex social interactions.
Adolescent Decision Making: Reduced Culpability in the Criminal Justice System and Recognition of Capability in Other Legal Contexts
Adolescents should receive reduced criminal justice penalties but increased medical decision autonomy, especially for end-of-life choices. This is because their decision-making capacity varies significantly with context.
State v. Comer
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled a mandatory 30-year sentence for juvenile murderers unconstitutional. The court found it didn't allow for demonstrating rehabilitation, letting offenders seek sentence review after 20 years.
State v. Bunch
The court upheld Chaz Bunch's conviction, finding his lawyer's alleged errors did not prejudice the outcome. Bunch's alibi defense was deemed insufficient to overturn the original verdict.
People v. Parks
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled mandatory life-without-parole for 18-year-olds unconstitutional. The court cited late-adolescent brain development and a lack of proportionality in these sentences.
State v. Conner
The Court ruled that juvenile offenders sentenced to life with parole must have a parole opportunity after 40 years, unless deemed permanently incorrigible. This 2022 North Carolina case addressed consecutive sentences for juveniles.
State v. Kelliher
The Court ruled a juvenile sentence over 40 years before parole is life without parole, violating cruel and unusual punishment protections. This applied to a defendant's 50-year parole-eligible sentence.
In re S.D.
The Vermont Supreme Court ruled Miranda warnings are not required for juveniles in non-felony delinquency proceedings. The court determined the key factor is whether a reasonable juvenile felt free to leave during questioning.
Thomas v. Stitt
The Tenth Circuit affirmed Dwain Thomas's imprisonment, finding no constitutional violations during his conviction or sentencing. Thomas had challenged his detention, arguing procedural errors.
Brief of Amici Curiae Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, et al., in Support of Petitioner-Appellants
The brief argues that young adults, aged 19, sentenced to natural life should be allowed to challenge their sentences. It seeks to clarify the standard for filing such appeals, citing evolving understanding of brain development.
Brief for Psychology and Neuroscience Scholars in Support of Respondent
The brief argues that a football coach's postgame prayers coerced student athletes, violating the Establishment Clause. Students felt pressured to join due to the coach's authority and fear of negative consequences.
Brief of Amici Curiae Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, TeamChild, and Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that adultification bias against children of color can lead to unfair treatment in court, both in being tried as adults and in sentencing. It suggests new rules to address this bias.
Brief of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner
The brief argues that current law does not properly protect children in adult court. It seeks a new rule creating a presumption that children should receive lighter sentences, aligning with state constitutional protections.
Brief of King County Department of Public Defense
The brief argues that registering youth under 18 as sex offenders is harmful and lacks public safety benefits. Research shows 97% of these youth do not reoffend, while registration makes them targets and increases suicide attempts.
Brief of the American Bar Association as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners
The ABA argues that sentencing a juvenile to life without parole is unconstitutional due to juveniles' lesser culpability. Such sentences are disproportionate and do not serve justice's goals.