Supreme Court cases (modern)

Question 1

more recent SC cases

Answer 1

many of these cases deal with two related issues:
- the ability of a court to sentence juveniles to death
- the ability of a court to sentence juveniles to life without parole

Question 2

stanford v kentucky

Answer 2

• 17 year old convicted of homicide, at same time16 year old convicted of homicide and sentenced to death
• attorneys for both alleged that imposing the death penalty on such a young person violated constitutional rights
• question: is the death penalty for someone under the age of 18 cruel and unusual punishment

Question 3

stanford v kentucky ruling

Answer 3

• no, sentencing those underage of 18 is not cruel and unusual punishment
• largely, conservative Supreme Court ruled that it is necessary to look at society’s evolving decency standards
• when doing so, justices saw no consensus in the US regarding whether Americans viewed death penalty for 16 and 17 year olds as cruel and unusual, thus sentences to death upheld
• justices left open the possibility that it might be cruel and unusual in the future

Question 4

Roper v Simmons facts

Answer 4

• Simmons was sentenced to death for homicide in the Missouri
• simmons appealed arguing that it was cruel and unusual punishment to sentence juveniles to death
• courts kept rejecting it but Missouri state SC stayed the execution until the US SC ruled on another case
  (Atkins vs. Virginia: SC ruled it is cruel and unusual to sentence a mentally disabled person to death)
• based on this ruling Missouri SC now ruled that sentencing juvenile to death was unconstitutional
• state of Missouri challenged this ruling

Question 5

graham v florida facts

Answer 5

• graham was convicted of armed burglary and attempted armed robbery- Florida state sentenced graham to mandatory life sentence without possibility of parole
• lawyer argued that it violated 8th amendment
• district court rejected the argument and upheld conviction

Question 6

graham v florida ruling

Answer 6

question: does mandatory life without parole for juveniles constitute cruel and unusual punishment
two key elements:
1) Is it wrong, on its face, to sentence a juvenile to mandatory life without parole? if no then:
2) it is unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile to mandatory life for committing a non-homicide offense?
Ruling:
- it is not unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile to mandatory life with our parole
- it is unconstitutional to sentence them to mandatory life with our parole for non-homicide crime
Juveniles could still be sentenced to mandatory life without parole, but only for homicides

Question 7

miller v Alabama facts

Answer 7

• 14 year old Evan miller beat a man to death with a baseball bat and then set the victims trailer ablaze
• convicted and sentenced to mandatory life without the possibility of parole
• another similar case in Arkansas

Question 8

miller v alabama ruling

Answer 8

question- is it cruel and unusual to punishment to sentence a juvenile to mandatory life without parole?
Rulling: yes It is unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile life without parole, argued that children are constitutionally different from adults when it comes to sentencing
- juveniles are less culpable- psychological and neurological research shows they are less developed- moreover are unable to leave adverse home environments which may also influence culpability

Question 9

montgomery v lousiana

Answer 9

ruled that findings in miller case apply retroactively