| LIFE SENTENCES FOR JUVENILES |
The United States Supreme Court is at odds over whether juveniles should be subject to life sentences without the possibility of parole (LWOP).
The issue stems from two cases currently before the Court involving men sentenced to LWOP in Florida for violent crimes committed when they were teenagers. One man raped an elderly woman when he was 13 while the other was convicted for armed robberies committed when he was 16 and 17.
Attorneys for both argue such a sentence is "cruel and unusual punishment" as juveniles have a greater capacity to change, thus, should be given a second chance.
The quandary dividing the Court, however, is not new one. Rather, it is one long debated within the juvenile criminal justice system. That is, how do we reconcile the historical goal of rehabilitation with the violent, often gruesome, nature of the juvenile's crime.
While the Court has previously rejected the application of the death penalty for juvenile offenders, finding them to be less responsible than adults, it seems hardpressed to unanimously extend this relief when it comes to locking a juvenile away for life.
As stated by Justice Alito, "Some of the actual cases are so horrible that I couldn't have imagined them if I hadn't actually seen them." Conversely, Justice Bader-Ginsburg raised the question of whether teenagers, whose mental, emotional and physical maturity is incomplete, can be "accurately evaluated" at the time of sentence.
Regardless of the Court's decision, this is an issue not likely to be fully resolved anytime soon. |
Posted By The Law office of Barney B. Gibbs on November 20, 2009 09:28 am | Permalink  |