Supported the position that the state must apply children’s federal insurance benefits under Title II and Title XVI in accordance with the children’s best interests and not to reduce the state’s foster care system’s financial burden.
Addressed the issue of a 12-year-old’s competency to stand trial and whether his due process rights were violated by the trial court’s failure to order competency evaluations.
Surveyed statutes and social science literature in a lawsuit involving the interpretation of the “reasonable efforts” to preserve and reunite families provision of the Adoption and Assistance Child Welfare Act.
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 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.
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.
Argued for a half-brother’s standing to participate in child welfare proceedings involving his sibling and that the child advocate’s representation of both children constituted a conflict of interest.
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: