Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Pepper v. United States
The Court held that judges can consider a defendant's rehabilitation, including drug recovery, when resentencing. This decision restores judicial discretion in sentencing.
Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Respondent
Courts should use objective factors to determine if a suspect is "in custody" for Miranda warnings, not a suspect's age or psychological vulnerabilities. Adding age would complicate Miranda and open the door to other subjective factors.
Frontostriatal Maturation Predicts Cognitive Control Failure to Appetitive Cues in Adolescents
Research suggests adolescent risk-taking is linked to an imbalance in brain development. Brain regions seeking rewards mature faster than those controlling impulses, leading to heightened risk behaviors.
Peers Increase Adolescent Risk Taking by Enhancing Activity in the Brain’s Reward Circuitry
Teenagers take more risks than adults, especially when friends are present. This behavior likely stems from two brain systems developing at different rates during adolescence.
Adolescent Brain Development and Drugs
Adolescent brains are still developing, especially the parts for logical reasoning and impulse control. This makes young people more prone to risk-taking and vulnerable to drug use, particularly in emotional or peer-influenced situations.
Braking and Accelerating of the Adolescent Brain
Adolescents act more impulsively and engage in riskier behavior than adults. This behavior stems from an imbalance in brain development, where emotion-driven regions mature faster than areas responsible for self-control.
Early Health Risk Factors for Violence: Conceptualization, Evidence, and Implications
Research on violence and aggression has overlooked early childhood health factors, especially prenatal ones. Current theories often miss integrating social, biological, and health risk factors in understanding how these behaviors develop.
Juvenile Justice in the US: Facts for Policymakers
Adolescent brains are still developing, impacting decision-making and increasing risk-taking. Incarceration in traditional facilities harms many nonviolent youth and fails to provide needed services, contributing to re-arrests.
Maturation of Limbic Corticostriatal Activation and Connectivity Associated with Developmental Changes in Temporal Discounting
The article examines how foresighted adaptive behavior and self-control develop through adolescence. It notes that impulsivity and risk-taking are common in this period, and it explores how the brain matures to affect these behaviors.
'Willpower' Over the Life Span: Decomposing Self-Regulation
Early "marshmallow test" studies found that children's ability to delay gratification predicted better outcomes in adulthood, including higher SAT scores and coping skills. The research now examines the biological basis of self-regulation.
Rhoades v. Henry
The court found that new expert opinions on the defendant's mental state were speculative and did not show that lawyer error impacted the case outcome. Strong aggravating evidence weighed against prejudice claims.
Adolescent decision making: Reduced culpability in the criminal justice system and recognition of capability in other legal contexts
This article argues for increased adolescent autonomy in medical decisions, while simultaneously advocating for reduced criminal culpability for teenagers. Different legal approaches are justified by these varying contexts.
State v. Folk
The Idaho Supreme Court overturned a conviction, finding no evidence that a defendant's voice would traumatize a child witness. Restrictions on cross-examination were therefore unsupported.
State v. Stewart
The court reversed a murder conviction, ruling that evidence of decades of abuse was relevant. Cumulative trauma can impact reasoning and intent, affecting premeditation and malice.
Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner
The brief argues New Hampshire courts violated due process by not assessing suggestive identification reliability, regardless of state action. It asserts reliability is key for admitting identification evidence to ensure fair trials.