Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
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.
Crime-Specific Recidivism in Criminal Justice Clients with Substance Use - A Cohort Study
Previously sentenced individuals often reoffend, with high reconviction rates globally. Substance use disorders are strongly linked to increased offending, and mental health issues are common among those with SUDs.
Neurobiological mechanisms and related clinical treatment of addiction: A review
Substance use disorder (SUD) is a chronic, relapsing brain disease characterized by compulsive drug seeking, loss of control, and negative emotional states.
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.
Amicus Curiae of Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan for Defendant-appellant John Antonio Poole
This brief argues a later request for judgment relief is valid due to a retroactive law change. It also claims Michigan's constitution prohibits mandatory life without parole for young adults without individual review.
Brief of Amici Curiae Neuroscientists, Psychologists, and Criminal Justice Scholars in Support of Defendant-appellant Mr. Poole
The brief argues that mandatory life without parole sentences are unconstitutional for late adolescents. Scientific evidence shows no meaningful difference in brain development between those under and over 18.
Brief for Roderick & Solange Macarthur Justice Center as Amicus Curiae Supporting Defendant-appellant
The brief argues that mandatory life without parole sentences for young adults are cruel. It claims this violates the Michigan Constitution, which offers broader protection than the U.S. Constitution.
Brief of the Sentencing Project et al. in Support of Appellant Sheldon Mattis
This brief argues that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for 18-to-20-year-olds are unconstitutional. It suggests extending this protection to all late adolescents, citing developmental science and evolving standards of decency.
Brief of Amici Curiae for the Eastern District Attorney
The brief argues that mandatory life without parole is constitutional for 18-20 year olds who commit first-degree murder. It asserts that current science does not require extending protections for juveniles to this older age group.
Brief for Psychology and Neuroscience Scholars in Support of Respondent
The brief argues that a coach's post-game prayers coerced student athletes, violating the Establishment Clause. It contends students felt pressured to participate due to the coach's authority and fear of negative consequences.
Brief of the Juvenile Innocence & Fair Sentencing Clinic in Support of Appellant Reyes
This brief argues that courts should consider juvenile brain science when evaluating a minor's criminal intent. It contends that scientific evidence provides a more complete picture of adolescent decision-making.
Amicus Curiae of Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan for Defendant-appellant John Antonio Poole
This brief argues a later motion for relief is based on a retroactive change in law. It also claims Michigan's constitution bans mandatory life without parole for young adults without individual review.
Brief of Neuroscientists, Psychologists, and Criminal Justice Scholars in Support of Defendant-appellant Sheldon Mattis
Massachusetts law currently bars life sentences without parole for those under 18. This brief argues that scientific evidence shows 18-20 year olds are similar to younger adolescents, making such sentences inappropriate for them as well.
Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center, American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, Juvenile Sentencing Project at Quinnipiac University School of Law, and Deborah Labelle in Support of Defendant-appellant John Antonio Poole
This brief argues that mandatory life without parole for 18-year-olds is unconstitutional. It states that adolescents at this age are developmentally similar to those under 18, who are already protected from such sentences.