Legal Docket

We argued that a juvenile's right to due process is violated when he is automatically transferred to the adult system contrary to U.S. and Washington Supreme Court precedent articulating that youth cannot be mandatorily treated as adults.

We argued that Miller and Montgomery establish a presumption against life without parole, which requires a determination that a juvenile has no potential for rehabilitation prior to imposing a life without parole sentence.

The State appealed the trial court’s decision that lifetime registration of an adult for a crime committed as a juvenile is unconstitutional. We argued that the appeal is moot in light of Commonwealth v. Muniz, where the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held retroactive registration under SORNA unconstitutional.

We argued that imposing felony murder liability on an unarmed 16-year-old decoy for the actions of an armed co-defendant in a robbery gone bad contravenes U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence and adolescent neuroscientific research.

We argued that Washington’s statute permitting Miller-defendants to petition a sentencing review board for early release fails to meaningfully remedy an unconstitutional 75-year sentence imposed on a 17-year-old.

We argued that the death penalty is unconstitutional as applied to 18- to 21-year-olds because they share many of the defining characteristics of youth under the age of 18 that inherently make them less culpable and more amenable to rehabilitation than adults.

We argued that Arizona's postconviction evidentiary hearing is an inappropriate prerequisite to resentencing juvenile lifers because it places the burden on the defendant to demonstrate eligibility for a resentencing hearing.

Juvenile Law Center filed an amicus brief on behalf of a 15-year-old who was transferred to adult court without citing any specific findings of fact or evidence underpinning the transfer decision, and subsequently sentenced to 99 years in an adult prison.