Juveniles in US Face Life Imprisonment with No Parole Possibility.

Introduction

Individuals under 18 years are considered children throughout the United States as the law holds them incapable of demonstrating adult functions. Consequently, when minors err or make wrong law choice, they usually consider law being lenient on juvenile individuals. However, the case changed in 2012, resulting in life imprisonment for juveniles without parole’s possibility. With the Supreme Court ruling on Miller V. Alabama’s case, the earlier practice on juveniles has changed forever. The paper focuses on developing a Case brief based on the Miller V. Alabama case study.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Court Case Description

In 2012, the Supreme Court was presented with a case concerning the ruling of two related cases, both involving life imprisonment sentence for the minor without parole possibility. Evan Miller, aged 14 years on July 2003, he killed Cole Cannon through baseball beatings and later decided to burn Cannon’s body within a trailer. “The trial court sentenced Miller to a mandatory term of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole” (Miller v. Alabama, 2017). The case followed the denial of petitions by the court considering the violation of the Eighth Amendment on unusual and cruel punishment prohibition.

The accompanying case involved Kuntrell Jackson and the other two teens aged 14 years who were accused of having robbed a store in 1999. The store clerk had been killed with a shotgun during the robbery. The court ruling found Jackson with a capital murder felony after the trial. Similar to Miller, Jackson was given a life sentence without parole. Early 2008, Jackson filled a petition in circuit court seeking habeas corpus writ. The argument presented was that the sentence gives to him was excessive and unusual and was a violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Constitutional Amendment. Just like in Miller’s case, Jackson’s petition was denied.

Miller V. Alabama Case Facts

Miller v. Alabama is an excellent example of a case of juvenile justice. The case happened at the end of the year, 2012. The final ruling of the case occurred in the same year. As a final ruling, the case granted an order of life sentences to the accused without a possibility of the application of parole. Miller stood charged for the murder of Cole Cannon.

The biggest problem with this case ruling is that the accused was transferred from a Juvenile court. Miller was transferred to a county circuit court where his trials were conducted. Through that, Miller was to be tried in the position of an adult even though he was way underage. Furthermore, Miller had not yet reached the age of consent. Soon after the final ruling was made, Miller filed a new motion. He required that he should be tried again. The reason behind the move was that a minor should not be deterred from getting parole. Minors are granted freedom to get probation.

Crimes bear different definitions and explanation each time it is committed. Crime can be termed as an ambiguous attribute. Concerning this case, when an accused person commits murder, it becomes a crime that is never to be left unpaid. The accused should be tried and made to pay the consequences of their actions. They should never be allowed to go unpunished.

However, this particular case entails a minor who could have committed the crime without understanding the repercussions. Miller could have killed Cole Cannon without acknowledging the consequences of his actions. Also, parole is always given to minors. Miller had not attained the age of adults or the majority in this case. Though this argument, it can be termed that the jury had made a choice that was against or was misled per ethics of the entire system of criminal justice.

Also, it can be said that the jury had significantly violated the rights of a child in the event where he imposed Miller to serve life imprisonment. Even though the jury imposed the final decision in his sound mind, the punishment can be said to be cruel. It is a final ruling that, in this circumstance, should not be accepted.

The case creates tension. Though homicide is a severe case, the constitution guidelines should be followed. In the constitution, it is stipulated on the difference between an adult and a child in the aspect of sentencing. Therefore, a child should be granted parole. Children should be subjected to guidance and counseling. The accused children should attend to counselors for a specific assigned period, after which they are to be set free.

Miller V. Alabama Case Issue

Did the juvenile court ruling on Miller V. Alabama who had convicted of murder and sentenced for a life sentence violation to the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment of the United States constitution?

U.S. Supreme Court Decision

Through the use of 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court decided that life imprisonment for individuals with the 14 age bracket with parole imposition is a violation of the Eighth and fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits against unusual and cruel punishment. According to the Supreme Court ruling, the punishment imposed on the offender must match the offense.

The court had also held the amendment under review, which prohibits life imprisonment for juvenile individuals without paroles and non-homicide individuals as well as death penalty rulings for the juvenile (Miller v. Alabama, 2017). Eventually, the court ruling concluded that, when it comes to children, the sentencing purpose is completely different from the adults. Although the imposition of mandatory imprisonment for adults does not violate the Eighth Amendment, passing life imprisonment without paroles is disproportionate and unconstitutionally wrong for children (Miller v. Alabama, 2017)

Death Penalty Status from the Previously Cases

The death penalty has been constantly argued in the current legislative system in the modern era. The first case in America involving juvenile execution happened in Massachusetts back in 1642, which a long history of precedent. Over that period, at least 365 have faced life sentences under Juvenile crime. A critical change has, however, occurred since 2005 in the criminal justice system. After the Eighth Amendment, the court ruled that sentencing individuals aged less than 18 years is an unusual and cruel punishment and, therefore, should be highly disregarded by the American constitution.

Opinions of the Juvenile Death Penalty

The supreme court of the United States made essential considerations in a case requiring the determination of how an accused would be punished. One of them is the age of the offender. One of the reasons for this consideration was that the guilt of the crimes committed by adults was inheritably more than those committed by a juvenile. Some reasons, such as the lack of comparable education, the juvenile’s inexperience, and immaturity, lead the minor to make irrational decisions that make them unable to identify the impact of their conduct.

In comparison to the adults, the minors are more subjective to factors such as peer pressure and emotions. All these stands to reason why the minors are motivated to rush into actions without understanding the consequences.

They are the same reasons why juveniles are not given the responsibilities and privileges of adults. Thus, they should not stand a chance to be punished as adults in court. Furthermore, they should not be held fully accountable for participating in illegal conduct. After considering this carefully, the U.S Supreme Court concluded that the ruling against the sentencing and administering the death penalty to minors should be implemented. For the same reasons as the Supreme Court, I agree with their consideration. It is logical to punish juveniles to a lesser degree than the majors. I also believe that rehabilitating minors is a better step in correcting the erroneous conduct of minors.

Miller v. Alabama Case Best Suited Waiver

The judicial waiver is the most suitable in the Miller V. Alabama case. In such a case, the Judge has the authority to waive the jurisdictions set for juvenile court and decide to deviate the case under criminal court. In criminal court, the Judge can examine aspects such as maturity level, offense committed, young age, school performance, and their apparent relationship with the parents. By employing these measures, the Judge is capable of determining the extent of the juvenile threat to the community. The Judge determines the future impact of the justice system to a criminal act. Considering all information surrounding the juvenile conduct ensures ruling is made with such considerations in mind as opposed to an adult case where the emphasis is put towards punishment.

Reference

Miller v. Alabama. (2017). Case Summary and Case Brief. https://legaldictionary.net/miller_v_alabama