Juvenile Law Center’s brief argues that the mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole imposed on a 16-year-old is a disproportionate punishment under the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions.
Argued that a juvenile’s 75-year sentence for a crime in which the victims suffered no serious injury is disproportionate and violates state, federal and international law.
Juvenile Law Center challenged the constitutionality of a Pennsylvania law (Act 53) that allows courts to order involuntary civil commitments for minors found to be drug dependent.
Argued that the use of delinquency adjudications to enhance an adult criminal sentence violates US Supreme Court precedent as well as California's commitment to maintaining a separate juvenile justice system.
Juvenile Law Center argued that juvenile court should retain discretion to spare children from permanent stigma associated with lifetime sex offender registration.
Supporting a juvenile defendant in Illinois who challenged the representation he received in court, when his defense lawyer sacrificed his defense believing that it was in the child’s "best interests."
Challenged the court’s finding that an autistic juvenile was competent to stand trial and that there was sufficient grounds to adjudicate the juvenile delinquent based on resisting arrest and related charges.
Argued that a sentence of 110 years to life (three consecutive life-terms) for a non-homicide offense committed as a juvenile violates the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Graham v. Florida.
Follow: