Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- 2006 (1)
- 8th amendment (1)
- AEDPA (1)
- Abdul Kabir (1)
- Abdul-Kabir (1)
-
- Abdul-Kabir v. Quarterman (1)
- Aggravating factors (1)
- Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (1)
- Attempted criminal mischief (1)
- Brewer (1)
- Brewer v. Quarterman (1)
- CPLR 2221 (1)
- CPLR section 2221 (1)
- Capital cases (1)
- Capital punishment cases (1)
- Competence of defendant (1)
- Criminal mischief (1)
- Death penalty (1)
- Death penalty jurisprudence (1)
- Death qualified jurors (1)
- Death qualified jury (1)
- Double Jeopardy Clause (1)
- Eighth amendment (1)
- Elimination of a juror (1)
- Exclusion of a jury (1)
- Family Court (1)
- Ford v. Wainwright (1)
- Harmless error (1)
- In re S.S. (1)
- In re SS (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Juvenile Law
Miller'S Promise: Re-Evaluating Extreme Criminal Sentences For Children, Nick Straley
Miller'S Promise: Re-Evaluating Extreme Criminal Sentences For Children, Nick Straley
Washington Law Review
Scientific, legal, and societal notions about youth have come together to reaffirm an age-old concept—children are different and they change as they grow older. In recent decisions, the United States Supreme Court has required courts and legislatures to take a new look at extreme criminal sentences imposed upon children. Life without parole sentences and decades-long, determinate sentences are constitutionally suspect when applied to children because they fail to adequately account for the dynamism of youth. Miller v. Alabama and Graham v. Florida announced two important principles: (1) that an extreme sentence can only be imposed upon a child following an …
An Analysis Of Death Penalty Decisions From The October 2006 Supreme Court Term, Richard Klein
An Analysis Of Death Penalty Decisions From The October 2006 Supreme Court Term, Richard Klein
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Family Court Of New York, Nassau County - In Re S.S., Steven Fox
Family Court Of New York, Nassau County - In Re S.S., Steven Fox
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Stop Presumptive Transfers: How Forcing Juveniles To Prove They Should Remain In The Juvenile Justice System Is Inconsistent With Roper V. Simmons & Graham V. Florida, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 365 (2014), Rachel Fugett
UIC Law Review
Overly expansive juvenile transfer laws are inconsistent with the Court’s reasoning because their primary objective is to transfer juveniles into the adult criminal justice system solely for the purpose of punishing and sentencing them like adults. In so doing, expansive juvenile transfer laws, more often than not, largely ignore a juvenile’s diminished culpability and greater capacity for change.