Legal Docket

We argued that an aggregate 90-year sentence for offenses committed by a juvenile violates Miller because it is the functional equivalent of life without parole and was imposed without consideration of the Miller factors.

We argued that the adult prosecution of a person who committed a crime as a juvenile but was apprehended after his 21st birthday is irreconcilable with Ohio’s commitment to protecting young children in the justice system.

We argued that a suspicionless body cavity search of a 12-year-old girl detained for a minor offense is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

We argued that both Miller and Montgomery establish a presumption against imposing life without parole sentences on juveniles, who are categorically less culpable than adults. We further argued that imposing a life without parole sentence on a juvenile convicted of felony murder is unconstitutional because it attributes the same level of culpability and foreseeability to each participant in the crime regardless of their level of participation or neurological development.

We urged the court to grant Mr. Taylor’s habeas petition and clarify the process and standards for others similarly situated in light of the fact that Miller and Montgomery establish a presumption against life without parole.

Argued that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to give proper weight during transfer or sentencing to the age and related characteristics of a physically and sexually abused 15-year-old who participated in a murder with the adult who was abusing her.

Argued that mandatory lifetime sex offender registration applied to children is punishment in violation of the U.S. and the Illinois constitutional bans on the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment and due process.

Juvenile Law Center, with Public Interest Law Center and other amici, filed an amicus brief in the Florida Supreme Court on behalf of a 15-year-old child sentenced to concurrent 45 years sentences for nonhomicide offenses.