Posts Tagged ‘juvenile’

Nov92009

Are Juveniles Lawfully Subject to Life without Parole?

The United States Supreme Court will entertain oral argument today on the issue of whether a life sentence without parole for a juvenile offender convicted of a non-murder offense violates the Eight Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The Court has already decided that juveniles are not subject to the death penalty.

Terrence Graham was 16 years old when he was convicted of burglary and attempted armed robbery. He received a one year sentence. Shortly after his release he earned a sentence of life without parole upon being convicted of armed residential burglary and robbery. His criminal defense lawyers argued on appeal that the life sentence, for any juvenile, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

In 2005, the Supreme Court issued a deeply divided opinion when deciding that juveniles cannot be executed. The composition of the Court, of course, has changed radically in the last several years.  Mr. Graham may have wished for a speedier appeal process. Oral arguments in his case, and a transcript of the arguments, will be available at http://www.oyez.com.

Aug32009

Juvenile Offenses can be used as Strikes

Juvenile adjudications (convictions) can be used against adult criminal defendants under the “three strikes” law even though juvenile defendants have no right to a jury trial. The California Supreme Court, in People v Nguyen, held that prior juvenile adjudications that qualify as serious or violent felonies (”strikes”) can used to substantially increase an adult criminal defendant’s felony sentence, despite the fact that juveniles are not entitled to a trial by jury. 

In Nguyen, the Court emphasized that a defendant is still free to contest the fact of a prior conviction in the adult case, and, of course, a defendant can always challenge whether the juvenile adjudication actually qualifies as a serious or violent felony offense. Juvenile cases from outside of California are example of those types of cases often subject to successful challenge on the issue of whether they qualify as a strike offense.  But for now, criminal defense attorneys can no longer successfully raise 5th 6th and 14th Amendment objections against the use of the juvenile case as a strike solely due to the lack of a jury trial right in juvenile court. 

The California Supreme Court may get overruled on this issue by the U.S. Supreme Court.  Criminal defense lawyers therefore must continue to object to the use of juvenile offense as strikes in order to preserve this issue for appeal, especially for criminal defendants looking at a life sentence.