Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:25 am
Time: 3:25 am
Results for life without parole, juveniles
3 results foundAuthor: American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan Title: Basic Decency: Protecting t5he Human Rights of Children Summary: Six years ago, through polling and focus groups, citizens of Michigan were asked this question: “How should we treat Michigan youth involved in homicide crimes?” People weighed the importance of just punishment, the need for public safety, and also considered their social responsibility to the troubled youth involved in the crime. Results revealed that these Michigan residents were deeply concerned that the most severe sentence our state laws can impose on an adult who commits murder is likewise imposed on a child who did not. They were also uncomfortable to learn that Michigan’s current laws do not allow a jury or a judge to consider a juvenile’s age, abusive upbringing, troubled environment, lack of maturity, or their potential for rehabilitation before imposing adult punishment. Most of those polled were unaware that hundreds of adolescents in our state, some as young as 14, have been sentenced to die in prison without an opportunity to demonstrate their remorse, show their potential for rehabilitation, or prove that they pose no risk to society. The 2006 polling revealed strong public opposition to our current laws, which require sentencing all young people between the ages of 14 and 17, who are convicted of an offense involving a first-degree homicide, to spend the rest of their lives in adult prison without any opportunity for parole. When faced with the issue, people in Michigan strongly supported eliminating the life without parole sentence for juveniles.1 They recognized the distinct differences between adults and developing adolescents, and supported sentencing practices that would protect youthful offenders from the adult consequences of their decisions.2 In 2008 a bipartisan majority of the Michigan House of Representatives passed legislation that would end Michigan’s practice of sentencing young people under the age of 18 to life without parole. The Michigan Senate Judiciary Committee refused to release these bills for a vote and the laws mandating this punishment remain in place. Introduction To date, 376 young people have been sentenced to life without the possibility of parole in Michigan. Only one other state has more. In recent years, editorials in major media outlets have called for, at minimum, judicial discretion in sentencing. Some legislators who initially favored this punishment for youth have since called for reform. Former Representative Burton Leland, a Democrat from Detroit, repudiating his initial support of the 1995 Juvenile Justice Reform Act explained, “We wanted to let thugs know that they can’t hide behind their mother’s apron. Now, 25 years later, I think locking youthful offenders up for life is ridiculous.” 3 Prosecutors, who are central opponents of juvenile life without parole reform, often make the argument of “adult time for adult crime.” However, most adults do not spend the rest of their lives in prison for comparable homicide crimes because prosecutors have full discretion to offer plea bargains of a lesser sentence to those adults charged with homicide crimes. Even where children are offered plea bargains, they are at a significant disadvantage in negotiating these same pleas. In fact, young people in Michigan are more likely to receive longer sentences than adults for comparable offenses. This report examines the arguments for and against reforming Michigan’s laws that mandate a life without parole sentence for youth involved in certain homicide crimes. It addresses the disadvantages children face in the adult criminal justice system and analyzes the data resulting from the implementation of this sentence. This report also explores the fiscal and human costs of sentencing a young person to life without parole (LWOP) in Michigan. Details: Detroit, MI: ACLU of Michigan, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 16, 2012 at: http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/BasicDecencyReport2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/BasicDecencyReport2012.pdf Shelf Number: 125310 Keywords: HomicideJuvenile Offenders (Michigan)Life ImprisonmentLife SentenceLife Without Parole, JuvenilesSentencing, Juveniles |
Author: Kent, Jody Title: A Just Alternative to Sentencing Youth to Life in Prison Without the Possibility of Parole Summary: There are more than 2,500 people in the United States serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for crimes committed under the age of eighteen. In the spring of 2010, the United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of imposing such sentences on a subset of these juvenile offenders who were convicted of non-homicide crimes. This constitutional challenge was brought before the court in two cases, Sullivan v. Florida and Graham v. Florida, for for which arguments were heard in November 2009. As Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged in those oral arguments, the Court has previously recognized that “juveniles are different.” Regardless of whether the Court extends that precedent to find the sentencing of youth to life in prison without the possibility of parole unconstitutional in one or both of these cases, advocates for youth have called for reform of extreme sentencing policies, on the basis that they grossly undermine rational, fair, and age-appropriate treatment of youth. This Issue Brief begins by explaining why the practice of sentencing youth to life in prison without the possibility of parole is deeply flawed public policy. First, we address the long-recognized principle that youth are different from adults, reinforced in recent years by adolescent development brain science, as well as by examples of youth who were successfully rehabilitated. Second, we critique the frequently argued notion that harsh sentencing is necessary to protect public safety, a premise undermined by both the inconsistent and arbitrary application and by the resulting diversion of taxpayer dollars that could be used to increase public safety through prevention programs. Third, we discuss how the sentencing of youth to life in prison without the possibility of parole undermines America’s moral standing in the world, as the only nation in the world that imposes this irrevocable sentence on people under the age of eighteen. We conclude the Issue Brief with a suggested alternative to the practice of sentencing youth to life in prison without the possibility of parole which balances the need to hold youth who commit serious crimes accountable, while still recognizing their inherent capacity for change. We recommend the creation of a system that would allow for meaningful periodic review of sentences given to youth convicted of serious offenses to determine whether they continue to pose a threat to society or may be able to return to our communities as productive citizens. This is a common sense solution to an irrational and grossly misguided policy. Details: Washington, DC: American Constitution Society for Law and Society, 2010. 10p. Source: Issue Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed September 23, 2012 at http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Kent%20Colgan%20Juvenile%20Life%20Issue%20Brief_0.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Kent%20Colgan%20Juvenile%20Life%20Issue%20Brief_0.pdf Shelf Number: 126404 Keywords: Life Imprisonment, JuvenilesLife Without Parole, JuvenilesSentencing ReformSentencing, Juveniles |
Author: Rovner, Joshua Title: Juvenile Life Without Parole: An Overview Summary: Today, more than 2,500 individuals are serving a life sentence without possibility of parole for crimes committed as children. Juveniles serving life without parole (JLWOP) are unique to the United States; no other country currently imposes the sentence on people under 18 years old. Recent Supreme Court rulings have banned the use of capital punishment for juveniles and mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles (JLWOP). Still, the United States stands alone as the only nation that sentences people to life without parole for crimes committed before turning 18. This briefing paper reviews the Supreme Court precedents that limited the use of JLWOP and the challenges that remain. Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2014. 4p. Source: Policy Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed June 9, 2014 at http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/jj_Juvenile%20Life%20Without%20Parole.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/jj_Juvenile%20Life%20Without%20Parole.pdf Shelf Number: 132427 Keywords: Life Without Parole, Juveniles |