Posts in 'Amicus Curiae'

Our brief argued that juvenile's sentence to an extreme term of years sentence deprives them of a meaningful and realistic opportunity to obtain release and is thus unconstitutional pursuant to Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama.

Argued that sentencing juveniles to extreme term-of-years sentences deprives them of a meaningful and realistic opportunity to obtain release and is thus unconstitutional pursuant to Graham v. Florida.

Argued that placing the words “sex offender” on juvenile's driver’s license imposes stigma and restrictions in violation of procedural due process, as well as infringes reputation rights which are expressly protected by the Louisiana Constitution.

Argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's ban on mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles in Miller should apply retroactively to inmates like Mr. Martinez and Mr. Vallejo, who were sentenced prior to the Miller ruling. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion on October 16, 2015.

Argued that by imposing registration as a violent offender on juveniles without consideration of the distinguishing characteristics of youth or a youth’s individualized circumstances, Illinois’ Violent Offender Against Youth Registration Act (VOYRA) violates both Illinois and federal constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process.

Argued that the California Supreme Court should adopt a presumption in favor of immaturity and against imposing life without parole upon juvenile offenders.

Argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's ban on mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles in Miller should apply retroactively to inmates like Griffin, who was sentenced prior to the Miller ruling.

Argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's ban on mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles in Miller should apply retroactively to inmates like Vigil, who was sentenced prior to the Miller ruling.

Argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's ban on mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles in Miller should apply retroactively to inmates like Songster, who was sentenced prior to the Miller ruling.

Argued that 18 U.S.C. § 2241(c), the federal statute prohibiting sexual acts with children under the age of 12, was unconstitutional when the accused is also under 12.