Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
State v. Charles
A juvenile offender's 92-year sentence, with parole possible at age 60, was not a de facto life sentence. The Court found no Eighth Amendment violation for the 14-year-old at the time of the crime.
State v. Smith
The Nebraska Supreme Court found a 90-year sentence for a juvenile's non-homicide crime unconstitutional. This reversed an earlier life sentence, aligning with national precedent.
State v. Roby
The Iowa Supreme Court held there is no constitutional bar to mandatory minimum sentences for juveniles. However, the court sent Mr. Roby's case back for resentencing due to his youth when the crimes occurred.
Commonwealth v. Batts
The court found Qu'eed Bates' mandatory life without parole sentence for a crime committed at 14 unconstitutional. This decision applied new rulings that prohibit such sentences without considering youth.
State ex rel. Carr v. Wallace
The court ruled Mr. Carr's three life sentences were unconstitutional because the jury could not consider his youth. This violated the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
Steilman v. Michael
The Montana Supreme Court ruled a 17-year-old's 110-year sentence was not a life sentence. This was due to accumulated good-time credits and a previously discharged portion of his sentence.
People v. Holman
The Illinois Supreme Court found the defendant's life sentence for a murder committed at age 17 constitutional. The lower court properly considered his youth and individual circumstances when imposing the sentence.
State v. Zuber
The court ruled that lengthy juvenile sentences must consider the defendant's youth. Ricky Zuber, sentenced to 110 years as a teen, sought reconsideration based on Supreme Court precedent.
Garcia v. State
The Court denied relief to a juvenile offender sentenced to life without parole, finding a new law allowing resentencing could not be applied retroactively to his 1996 conviction.
Brief for Amicus Curiae Fair Punishment Project in Support of Petitioner, Willbanks and Nathan
The brief argues prior rulings protecting children from life sentences should extend to lengthy, combined sentences. It asserts that children's sentences must focus on rehabilitation.
State of New Mexico's Answer Brief to Amicus Brief in Chief
This brief argues that current Supreme Court rulings on juvenile sentencing do not prohibit lengthy aggregated sentences for multiple crimes.
Motion of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, Columbia Legal Services, and Washington Defender Association for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Respondent
This brief argues that juvenile life without parole, including de facto sentences, is unconstitutional under state law. It asserts that state protections are stronger than federal law regarding juvenile sentencing.
Amici Curiae Brief of Columbia Legal Services and TeamChild
This brief argues that juvenile courts undermine rehabilitation by denying record sealing without proper hearings. Public records create unfair barriers to housing, education, and jobs, especially for youth of color.
Brief of Amici Curiae Senator Angela Bryant, Senator Erica Smith-Ingram, Representative Kelly Alexander, Representative Larry Bell, Representative Jean Farmer-Butterfield, and Representative Rosa Gill et al., in Support of Defendant-Appellant
The brief argues that sentencing juvenile offenders to life without parole should be rare, reserved for extreme cases. It contends North Carolina's current scheme is unconstitutional, vague, and worsens racial disparities.
Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center, Campaign for Fair Sentencing of Youth, and Juvenile Sentencing Project in Support of Defendant-Appellee Harry Sharod James
This brief argues that sentencing youth to life without parole should be rare. It requires a detailed review of age-related factors, a juvenile's home life, peer pressure, and potential for rehabilitation.