Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Juvenile Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Juvenile Law

No Path To Redemption: Evaluating Texas’S Practice Of Sentencing Kids To De Facto Life Without Parole In Adult Prison, Lindsey Linder, Justin Martinez Oct 2020

No Path To Redemption: Evaluating Texas’S Practice Of Sentencing Kids To De Facto Life Without Parole In Adult Prison, Lindsey Linder, Justin Martinez

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.


Providing A Meaningful Opportunity For Release: A Proposal For Improving Washington's Miller-Fix, Maya L. Ramakrishnan Jun 2020

Providing A Meaningful Opportunity For Release: A Proposal For Improving Washington's Miller-Fix, Maya L. Ramakrishnan

Washington Law Review

Miller v. Alabama1 set forth new constitutional requirements that necessitated changes in Washington State’s sentencing law for children. In response, the Washington legislature passed RCW 9.94A.730: a parole statute that presumptively releases children who committed crimes after they have served twenty years. Unless the parole board finds they are more likely than not to commit a future crime if released, the Miller-fix statute requires that eligible petitioners are released. The parole board has wide discretion in determining whether someone is more likely than not to commit a future crime because the statute provides no guidance about how to make this …


In Re Cook And The Franklin Proceeding: New Door, Same Dilapidated House, Christopher Hawthorne, Marisa Sacks Feb 2020

In Re Cook And The Franklin Proceeding: New Door, Same Dilapidated House, Christopher Hawthorne, Marisa Sacks

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Cook was supposed to bring about a sea change in the way trial courts conduct Franklin mitigation hearings for youthful offenders. In fact, while Cook changed the procedure for initiating a post-conviction Franklin proceeding, little else has changed, including the lack of agreement among attorneys concerning best practices in these proceedings, and a less than less-than-enthusiastic response from the criminal defense bar. Absent any guidance from higher courts, the Franklin proceeding is limited by the personal and institutional energies and preferences of judges, prosecutors, public defenders and private defense counsel. The authors …