Argued that Colorado's mandatory statutory sentencing scheme for juveniles convicted of first degree murder is unconstitutional, pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Miller v. Alabama.
Challenged the adequacy of Philadelphia’s program of aftercare probation, which was responsible for a child’s course of treatment in, discharge from, and supervision following detention for juvenile offenses.
Argued that, to the extent that juvenie life without parole (JLWOP) sentences are ever constitutional, the sentencing judge must consider the factors laid out by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miller v. Alabama before sentencing a child to die in prison.
Argued that Nebraska’s mandatory statutory sentencing scheme is now unconstitutional pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Miller v. Alabama, which banned mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles.
Argued that California's sentencing statute, in which the presumptive sentence for any juvenile age 16 or older convicted of first degree murder with special circumstances is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, is unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama.
Supreme Court held the execution of juveniles unconstitutional. Juvenile Law Center’s brief argued the developmental differences between adolescents and adults in critical areas, including impulse control and understanding consequences.
Argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's ban on mandatory life without parole sentences in Miller v. Alabama should apply retroactively to juveniles who were sentenced to life without parole before the ban.