Search results for: sentencing

Authors: Stacie Nelson Colling, Adele Cummings

Abstract:

The United States Supreme Court recently announced that it is unconstitutional to sentence a child to life without parole for non-homicide offenses, and that each child so situated must be afforded a meaningful opportunity for release from prison in his lifetime. The Court also declared that it is unconstitutional to impose a mandatory sentence of life without parole on a child for homicide offenses. Across the United States, attorneys and advocates continue to litigate issues surrounding the implementation of these legal principles. Some states have held that any sentence to a finite term of years, no matter how long, is not the same as ‘life’ and therefore does not violate the constitution. Other states have held that a sentence to a term of years that is less than the expected life of that particular child is not unconstitutional. In Colorado, the courts have routinely looked to life expectancy estimates from governmental organizations to determine how long a particular child is expected to live. They then compare that the date that the child is expected to be eligible for parole, and if the child is expected to still be living when he is eligible for parole, the sentence is deemed constitutional. This paper argues that it is inappropriate, reckless, unconstitutional and not scientifically sound to use such estimates in determining whether a child will have a meaningful opportunity for release from prison and life outside of prison before he dies. This paper argues that the opportunity for release must mean more than a probability that a child will be released before his death, and that it must include an opportunity for a meaningful life outside of prison (not just the opportunity to be released and then die on the outside). The paper further argues that life expectancy estimates cannot guide a court or a legislature in determining whether a sentence is or is not constitutional.

Keywords: life without parole, life expectancy, juvenile sentencing, meaningful opportunity for release from prison

Procedia PDF Downloads 364

Authors: Khushboo Shah

Abstract:

Categorical bans on the death penalty and life-without-parole sentences for juvenile offenders in a growing number of countries have established a new era in juvenile jurisprudence. This has been brought about by integration of the growing knowledge in cognitive neuroscience and appreciation of the inherent differences between adults and adolescents over the last ten years. This evolving understanding of being a child in the criminal system can be aptly reflected through policies that incorporate the mitigating traits of youth. First, the presentation will delineate the structures in cognitive neuroscience and in particular, focus on the prefrontal cortex, the amygdala, and the basal ganglia. These key anatomical structures in the brain are linked to three mitigating adolescent traits—an underdeveloped sense of responsibility, an increased vulnerability to negative influences, and transitory personality traits—that establish why juveniles have a lessened culpability. The discussion will delve into the details depicting how an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex results in the heightened emotional angst, high-energy and risky behavior characteristic of the adolescent time period or how the amygdala, the emotional center of the brain, governs different emotional expression resulting in why teens are susceptible to negative influences. Based on this greater understanding, it is incumbent that policies adequately reflect the adolescent physiology and psychology in the criminal system. However, it is important to ensure that these views are appropriately weighted while considering the jurisprudence for the treatment of children in the law. To ensure this balance is appropriately stricken, policies must incorporate the distinctive traits of youth in sentencing and legal considerations and yet refrain from the potential fallacies of absolving a juvenile offender of guilt and culpability. Accordingly, three policies will demonstrate how these results can be achieved: (1) eliminate housing of juvenile offenders in the adult prison system, (2) mandate fitness hearings for all transfers of juveniles to adult criminal court, and (3) use the post-disposition review as a type of rehabilitation method for juvenile offenders. Ultimately, this interdisciplinary approach of science and law allows for a better understanding of adolescent psychological and social functioning and can effectuate better legal outcomes for juveniles tried as adults.

Keywords: criminal law, Juvenile Justice, interdisciplinary, neuroscience

Procedia PDF Downloads 302