Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons^™

An Analysis Of Death Penalty Decisions From The October 2006 Supreme Court Term, Richard Klein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Unreviewable Irredeemable Child: Why The District Of Columbia Needs Reverse Waiver, Jamie Stevens

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

In 2005 the U.S. Department of Justice estimated that adult criminal courts prosecuted 23,000 cases involving defendants under the age of eighteen nationwide. 2 This means that those defendants faced conviction and sentencing in adult courts. Transfer of those under eighteen into adult criminal court has become the states' first line of defense in the fight against youth crime. However, recent Supreme Court decisions have cast doubt on the wisdom, and even the constitutionality of that approach. Roper v. Simmons held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the death penalty for anyone under eighteen years of age. 3 Graham v. Florida …

The Evolution And Unintended Consequences Of Legal Responses To Childhood Sexual Abuse: Seeking Justice And Prevention, Alexandra Hunstein Roffman

Children's Legal Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Reforming The Division Of Juvenile Justice: Lessons Learned, Barry Krisberg

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Review For Release: Juvenile Offenders, State Parole Practices, And The Eighth Amendment, Sarah F. Russell

Indiana Law Journal

State parole boards have historically operated free from constitutional constraints when making decisions about whether to release prisoners. Recent Supreme Court decisions subject states to a new constitutional requirement to provide a “meaningful opportunity to obtain release” for at least some categories of juvenile offenders. Using original data collected through a survey, this Article provides the first comprehensive description of existing parole board release procedures nationwide and explores whether these practices comply with the Court’s Eighth Amendment mandate.

The Court’s recent decisions in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama prohibit sentences of life without the possibility of release (LWOP) …

Recidivism And Juvenile Offenders: The Role Of The Counselor, William C. Gordon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Solving The Problem: Rehabilitation, Reformation, And Other Solutions, Ralph A. Rossum, George Nicholson, Reuben Greenberg, William P. Haney Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Price They Pay: Protecting The Mother-Child Relationship Through The Use Of Prison Nurseries And Residential Parenting Programs, Anne E. Jbara

Indiana Law Journal

Over the past century, while advocates of prison nurseries have applauded their individual and societal benefits, opponents have criticized their touchy-feely undertones, arguing that children do not belong behind bars. New York instituted the first modern prison nursery program in 1901 at its Bedford Hills facility, and the nursery has existed ever since. The federal government and a number of other states have followed suit in developing programs that, to varying degrees, give mothers and infants an opportunity to remain together until the infant reaches a particular age. The requirements for such programs vary by state but generally only permit …

Cudgel Or Carrot: How Roper V. Simmons Will Affect Plea Bargaining In The Juvenile System , D. Brian Woo

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court held, in Roper v. Simmons, that the execution of convicted juveniles violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In addressing the issue, the Court determined that a national consensus had developed against the execution of juveniles. Ultimately, a majority of the court decided that a national public consensus had been reached against the execution of juveniles under 18 in age. With Roper, no longer can juveniles of any age be executed. This decision will undoubtedly affect the entire juvenile penal system, from how cases enter the system, to …

Graham On The Ground, Cara H. Drinan

Washington Law Review

In Graham v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to sentence a non-homicide juvenile offender to life in prison without parole. While states need not guarantee release to these juvenile offenders, they cannot foreclose such an outcome at the sentencing phase. Scholars have identified several long-term ramifications of Graham, including its likely influence on juvenile sentencing practices and on retributive justice theory. As yet unexamined, though, are the important and thorny legal questions that Graham raises for state judges and lawmakers in the very short term. To whom does the Graham decision apply? What …

New Paths For The Court: Protections Afforded Juveniles Under Miranda; Effective Assistance Of Counsel; And Habeas Corpus Decisions Of The Supreme Court’S 2010/2011 Term, Richard Klein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Solitary Confinement Of Juveniles In Adult Jails And Prisons: A Cruel And Unusual Punishment?, Anthony Giannetti

Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Masthead, Editors

University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change

No abstract provided.

Juvenile Sentencing In The Wake Of Graham V. Florida: A Look Into Uncharted Territory, Leanne Palmer

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supporting The Florida Legal Community's Response To Graham V. Florida, Ilona P. Vila

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Controlling Partners: When Law Enforcement Meets Discipline In Public Schools, Lisa H. Thurau, Johanna Wald

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rehabilitating Juvenile Sex Offenders With A Life Sentence, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 187 (2008), Adam Doeringer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Waiving Goodbye: Incarcerating Waived Juveniles In Adult Correctional Facilities Will Not Reduce Crime, Ellie D. Shefi

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Incarcerating waived juveniles in adult correctional facilities does not reduce crime or result in increased public safety; incarcerating juveniles with adults is deleterious to both the individual offender and society. This Note argues for a renewed focus on rehabilitative rather than retributive justice, and in so doing, proposes the implementation of a comprehensive continuum of graduated sanctions that includes networks of small, secure, highly structured maximum-security juvenile facilities, wilderness camps, residential and non-residential community-based programs, restitution, and fines. This Note further advocates for the incorporation of extensive education, vocational training and placement, counseling, treatment, supervision, mentoring, transitional, aftercare, and support …

Litigation Landmines: Obtaining Attorneys Fees In Conditions Of Confinement. Litigation After Bloomberg V. Christina A, Mark Soler

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Abuse of children in state institutions is a longstanding and notorious problem.1 Advocates for children have successfully brought federal civil rights litigation over the past thirty years to protect the lives, safety, and rights of children in jails,2 juvenile detention facilities, 3 and state corrections institutions. 4 In recent years, however, such litigation has become more difficult as a result of enactment of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) 5 and an array of United States Supreme Court decisions. In a number of decisions over the past two decades, the Supreme Court has significantly restricted the rights of prisoners and …

Comparing Children To The Mentally Retarded: How The Decision In Atkins V. Virginia Will Affect The Execution Of Jevenile Offenders , Robin M. A. Weeks

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Depriving Washington State's Incarcerated Youth Of An Education: The Debilitating Effects Of Tunstall V. Bergeson, Jamie Polito Johnston

Seattle University Law Review

The analysis begins in Section II with a general overview and summary of Tunstall v. Bergeson. Section III presents a brief legislative background of the statute at issue in Tunstall, Education Programs for Juvenile Inmates, RCW section 28A.193. Section IV discusses Tunstall's misinterpretation of these statutory provisions, demonstrating the Education Programs for Juvenile Inmates' disregard of the paramount duty to provide education to youth under twenty-one pursuant to the Basic Education Act and violation of the Washington Constitution, as discussed in Section V. Next, Section VI argues that because the right to education is a fundamental right under state law, …

Justice By Gender: The Lack Of Appropriate Prevention, Diversion And Treatment Alternatives For Girls In The Justice System

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Girls In The Juvenile Justice System, Robert E. Shepherd Jr.

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Sugar And Spice And Everything Nice: Female Juvenile Deliquency And Gender Bias In Punishment And Behavior In The Juvenile Courts, Jennifer Thibodeau

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Minors In Haiti's Prisons , Ismene Zarifis

Human Rights Brief

No abstract provided.

Pre-Initial Hearing Detention: Are The Police Department And Social Services Intake Following The Law?, Henry A. Escoto

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Are The Children Of Illinois Protected From Sex Offenders, 28 J. Marshall L. Rev. 883 (1995), Matthew J. Herman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Searches And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Examination Of Whether Incarcerated Juveniles Are Entitled By The Constitution To Rehabilitative Treatment, Andrew D. Roth

Michigan Law Review

This Note attempts to resolve the arguments presented in the literature and the case law and determine whether the federal Constitution mandates a right to treatment for involuntarily incarcerated juveniles. Part I examines the varied situations that have given rise to right to treatment claims. Part II elucidates the three principal theories on which right to treatment claims have been based: (1) that because the purpose of incarcerating juveniles is to promote their welfare, rehabilitation is mandated by the due process requirement that the nature of the commitment "bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is …

Expungement Of Criminal Convictions Under The Youth Corrections Act: The Need For Revision, Kenneth R. Taylor

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.