Juvenile Law Commons^™

Innocence Lost: The Dangers Of Life Imprisonment For Children At Whose Pleasure: D.B. (A Juvenile) V. The People [2024] Zmca 339 (18 December 2024), Samantha Smit, Louis Koen

SAIPAR Case Review

This piece examines the Zambian Court of Appeal's decision to overturn a life imprisonment sentence imposed on juvenile offenders, replacing it with detention ‘at the President's pleasure.’ The commentary explores the legal implications of this discretionary sentence, drawing parallels with similar controversies in other African jurisdictions, particularly Kenya, where such sentences have been criticized for undermining constitutional rights and the doctrine of separation of powers. The authors argue that ‘detention at the President's pleasure’ can effectively amount to an indefinite sentence, raising concerns about the uncertainty of imprisonment duration for child offenders. They suggest that the Zambian court missed an …

Taking Corrigibility Seriously, Dora Klein

Faculty Articles

This article argues that the Supreme Court's creation of a category of "irreparably corrupt" juveniles is not only an epistemological mistake but also a tactical mistake which has undermined the Court's express desire that only in the "rarest" of cases will juveniles be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Second Chances: Why Michigan Should Categorically Prohibit The Sentence Of Juvenile Life Without Parole, Richard Zhao

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United States is the only country in the world that sentences children to die in prison. This practice, known as juvenile life without parole (JLWOP), is condemned by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Yet twenty-five states still permit the sentence, and Michigan houses one of the nation’s largest JLWOP populations. Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s ban on some forms of JLWOP, more must be done to further limit the use of this sentence. The current JLWOP sentencing scheme is untenable, imposes a significant financial burden on taxpayers, and perpetuates racial inequality. This Note explores …

Reforming Federal Sentencing: A Call For Equality-Infused Menschlichkeit, Nora V. Demleitner

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

This piece, which serves as an Introduction to the Symposium Issue of the Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice, addresses both questions of pedagogy and federal sentencing. It starts by highlighting the value of a symposium on federal sentencing as a teaching, research, and advocacy tool before it turns to sentencing reform specifically.

Federal sentencing remains a highly contested area because it raises stark questions of equality and equitable treatment. Sentencing has long been unfair to minority defendants, African-Americans in particular, though the guidelines have in part mitigated racial disparities. Still the injustices perpetuated through …

Solitary Confinement Of Juvenile Offenders And Pre-Trial Detainees, Nicole Johnson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Juror Gender And Confession Evidence: An Exploratory Study Of Effects On Empathy And Trial Outcomes For Juvenile Defendants, Cynthia J. Najdowski, Jennifer N. Weintraub

Psychology Faculty Scholarship

Objectives: We explored how relations among juror gender, confession evidence, and empathy impacted verdicts for a juvenile defendant accused of a serious crime. Methods: Jury-eligible women and men (N = 128) participated in a mock trial involving a girl defendant who had either maintained her innocence, confessed voluntarily, or confessed under coercion. Participants reviewed case materials, received juror instructions, and reported their verdict and empathy for the girl defendant. A manipulation check ensured participants attended to details surrounding the confession and participants were grouped by whether they perceived the confession as voluntary or coerced. A logistic regression analysis examined main …

Juvenile Status Offenses: The Prejudicial Underpinnings Of The Juvenile Justice System, Zachary Auspitz

University of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Review

No abstract provided.

Chandler V. Mississippi: Brief Of Amici Curiae Current And Former Prosecutors, Department Of Justice Officials, And Judges In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara L. Mcquade

Appellate Briefs

Amici are current and former federal, state, and local prosecutors, Department of Justice officials, and judges with experience prosecuting, establishing policy for prosecuting, and sentencing for violent crimes, including those committed by juveniles. Amici recognize the importance of fair and proportionate sentencing to the credibility of the criminal justice system and the need to balance the impact of the crime on victims and survivors with the characteristics of the offender, including youth and the possibility of rehabilitation. Amici believe that states have an obligation to provide minimal procedural safeguards to effectuate this Court's direction to reserve the ultimate penalty of …

The New Unconstitutionality Of Juvenile Sex Offender Registration: Suspending The Presumption Of Constitutionality For Laws That Burden Juvenile Offenders, Spencer Klein

Michigan Law Review

In Smith v. Doe, the Supreme Court held that Alaska’s sex offender registration and notification statute did not constitute punishment and was therefore not susceptible to challenge under the Ex Post Facto Clause. In reaching that conclusion, the Court looked to the seven factors articulated in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez. To evaluate those factors, the Court applied a presumption of constitutionality, conducting the sort of narrow factual inquiry characteristic of rational basis review. Since Smith, courts have disagreed as to whether sex offender laws are punitive when applied to juveniles, and the Supreme Court has not yet addressed …

Back To Benevolence: The Case For Internet Access In Nevada's Juvenile Detention Centers, Michael Coggeshall

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Developmental Detour: How The Minimalism Of Miller V. Alabama Led The Court's "Kids Are Different" Eighth Amendment Jurisprudence Down A Blind Alley, Mary Berkheiser

Akron Law Review

With its narrow ruling, Miller has taken the Eighth Amendment kids are different jurisprudence on a deleterious detour that could lead Miller and Jackson and others like them to a certain dead end. Where Miller went wrong is the subject of this paper. It begins with Graham and the significance of the Court’s ruling that the Eighth Amendment categorically precludes imposition of a sentence of life without parole on a juvenile nonhomicide offender. Next, this paper turns to the Supreme Court’s decision in Miller, parsing the Court’s reliance on precedent and the reasoning that led it to adopt a ruling …

The Supreme Court And The Transformation Of Juvenile Sentencing, Elizabeth S. Scott, Thomas Grisso, Marsha Levick, Laurence Steinberg

Faculty Scholarship

In the past decade, the Supreme Court has transformed the constitutional landscape of juvenile crime regulation. In three strongly worded opinions, the Court held that imposing harsh criminal sentences on juvenile offenders violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. In combination, these cases create a special status for juveniles under Eighth Amendment doctrine as a category of offenders whose culpability is mitigated by their youth and immaturity, even for the most serious offenses. The Court also emphasized that juveniles are more likely to reform than adult offenders, and that most should be given a meaningful opportunity to …

From Death To Near-Death: The Fate Of Serious Youthful Offenders After Roper V. Simmons, Christopher A. Mallett

Social Work Faculty Publications

The United States juvenile death penalty was abolished in 2005 when the Supreme Court, in Roper v. Simmons, found this punishment to be cruel and unusual and in violation of the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment.1 This decision was the final step in ending the death sentence for those under the age of eighteen. While this sentence is no longer an option for retributively-inclined states, many serious youthful offenders continue to meet similar, and in some ways, comparably difficult fates. These fates include the wholesale transfer of serious youthful offenders to the criminal courts2 and the subsequent incarceration of tens of …

Applying Sex Offender Registry Laws To Juvenile Offenders: Biases Against Adolescents From Stigmatized Groups, Jessica M. Salerno, Margaret Stevenson, Cynthia J. Najdowski, Tisha R.A. Wiley, Bette L. Bottoms, Liana Peter-Hagene

Psychology Faculty Scholarship

The need to protect children from dangerous sex offenders has led to policies that require juvenile sex offenders to register on public online registries. It is important to determine the implications of these laws for the wellbeing of child victims and also for juvenile offenders on these registries. Is the application of these laws—designed for adult offenders—to juveniles appropriate, necessary, and supported by public sentiment? The chapter reviews current sex offender registration policies and psychological research addressing whether the assumptions underlying these laws are supported by research, public sentiment toward these laws, factors that might drive biases against stigmatized youth …

Void For Vagueness: State Statutes Proscribing Conduct Only For A Juvenile, Edward R. Roybal

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Dangerous Commitment , Jack Fleischli

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expanding The Neglected Role Of The Parent In The Juvenile Court , Raymond F. Vincent

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

People V. Olivas: Equalizing The Sentencing Of Youthful Offenders With Adult Maximums, William E. Harris

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stay No Longer: California Juvenile Court Sentencing Practices, Sharon O. Lightholder

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Compendium Of Major California Juvenile Law Decisions With Brief Analyses, 1979, Michael T. Lubinski, Robert M. Triplett

Pepperdine Law Review

Society has been plagued with the problem of whether the police, the courts and the correction agencies are to administer juveniles for their protection and treatment, or for their punishment. To facilitate a better understanding of juvenile administration the authors have analyzed the California juvenile law cases for the year 1979. The article consists of six major area of interest; parent-child custody, sentencing, procedure, jurisdiction, evidentiary and constitutional which will be used to highlight some of the more significant decisions in the past year, thus enabling the reader to assess changes occurring in the juvenile system.

Where For Art Thou Danforth: Bellotti V. Baird , David C. Boatwright

Pepperdine Law Review

The author's focus is upon a Supreme Court opinion dealing with the constitutional parameters of a minor's right to make an independent decision with respect to abortion. The majority, in an attempt to balance the often conflicting interests of the minor, the minor's parents, and the state, sets forth the minimum requirements with which parental consent statutes must comply. The author emphasizes the significance of the high court's plurality split regarding this issue, and cautions the practitioner as to the possibility of inconsistent rulings on such statutes in the future.

Fare V. Michael C.: Juveniles And In Custodial Interrogations , Gregory S. Chudacoff

Pepperdine Law Review

In the principal case, Fare v. Michael C., the United States Supreme Court rejects the position of the Supreme Court of California that a juvenile's request for the presence of his probation officer constitutes an invocation of the juvenile's right to remain silent within the meaning of the Miranda decision. The author examines the rationale applied by each court enroute to this split of opinion, and suggests a middle ground which would accommodate the concerns of both courts with respect to the protection of an accused juvenile at the custodial interrogation stage.

Status Offenders Should Be Removed From The Juvenile Court , Luke Quinn, Peter M. Hutchison

Pepperdine Law Review

Inadequate financial resources and overcrowded juvenile placement facilities have frequently been cited as grounds for the abrogation of the juvenile court's practice of retaining jurisdiction over status offenders. In this article, Judge Quinn suggests the existence of even more compelling reasons which support diversion of status offenders to programs better suited to their particular needs. The author contends that the juvenile court's jurisdiction should be confined to matters of fact-finding and adjudication, rather than intruding into areas within the domain of the parents, and into areas in which the court lacks the necessary expertise. It is argued that diversion of …

A Rationale For The Abolition Of The Juvenile Court's Power To Waive Jurisdiction , John Gasper, Daniel Katkin

Pepperdine Law Review

The juvenile court's power to waive jurisdiction which entails the transfer of juvenile offenders to adult courts presents a topic of longstanding controversy. It's rationale, one of protection of the public, has been labeled by the authors as untenable. Moreover, it is asserted that waiver of jurisdiction in such cases contravenes the very cornerstone of the juvenile court process--the doctrine of parens patriae. Three methods of transfer are seen to exist--legislative, prosecutorial, and judicial. Focusing on the latter, the authors posit an argument advocating the abrogation of the concept of waiver. Justification for this proposition is seen to flow from …

Juvenile Discovery: A Developing Trend And A Word Of Caution, Diane Geraghty

Pepperdine Law Review

The use of discovery is acknowledged as essential to the efficient administration of justice and to the fairness of the adversary system in both civil and criminal proceedings. However, the juvenile court system has been slow to implement various means of discovery, largely as a result of the doctrine of parens patriae and the unique nature of the juvenile process. Although a discernible trend indicates acceptance of pretrial discovery, there has been considerable experimentation at decisional and statutory levels to develop procedurally protective discovery mechanisms. Professor Geraghty traces the use of discovery in juvenile proceedings and devotes particular attention to …

Procedural Rights In The Juvenile Court: Incorporation Or Due Process?, Glen W. Clark

Pepperdine Law Review

The landmark Supreme Court decision in In re Gault established, among other things, a juvenile's right to counsel in delinquency prosecutions. However, the decision left unanswered certain questions relating to the nature and scope of that right. In this article, the author examines whether or not Gault initiated a special due process right to counsel for juveniles apart from that body of sixth amendment law previously developed in criminal cases. Alternatively, he wonders whether Gault was meant to initiate a process of selective incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the juvenile justice system. The author critically analyzes the resulting …

Enacting Legislation To Identify And Treat Children With Conduct Disorders, Donald J. Barnett, Ola Barnett

Pepperdine Law Review

The identification of conduct disordered children, that is, those children who are susceptible to becoming delinquent, is the first necessary step that must be undertaken if society's efforts to control a spiraling crime rate are to be successful. It is the authors' underlying premise that since the traditional approaches to rehabilitation have proven ineffective, it is incumbent upon the various state legislatures to become receptive to new methods and programs designed to prevent delinquency. The distinguishing feature of these alternatives would be early intervention and treatment. Admittedly, the authors note, many of these programs are experimental and based on the …

From Gault To Fare And Smith: The Decline In Supreme Court Reliance On Delinquency Theory , Victor L. Streib

Pepperdine Law Review

The Supreme Court's reliance upon research and scholarly commentaries which examine the sociological factors that contribute to delinquent behavior has declined considerably during the last fourteen years. The author, in an effort to explain this decline, analyzes the seven major juvenile cases which have been considered by the Court since 1966. He conducts this analysis by focusing upon the subject matter of each decision, the importance of the issues arising therein and the author of each opinion. While some similarities appear, no consistent pattern emerges from this analysis. The article concludes that while juvenile law is an area which is …

Thompson V. Oklahoma: Debating The Constitutionality Of Juvenile Executions, Susan M. Simmons

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Responding To The Ambiguity Of Miller V. Alabama: The Time Has Come For States To Legislate For A Juvenile Restorative Justice Sentencing Regime, Courtney Amelung

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.