The co-defendants thereafter asserted an Eighth Amendment, as-applied challenge to §1651’s mandatory life sentence provision. They contended that the life sentence provision constituted cruel and unusual punishment, under the two-prong test of Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010):The district court explained that, under prong one, a court must “compare the gravity of the offense and the severity of the sentence,” and determine “if that comparison yields ‘an inference of gross disproportionality,’ which should be a ‘rare’ result.” See Eighth Amendment Order 6 (quoting Graham, 560 U.S. at 60).
to petition for release to extended supervision under § 302.114(5), Paape after 30 years, Barbeau after about 35 years. Both argued their sentences were invalid under Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), and Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016). The court of appeals rejected Barbeau’s arguments last year, State v.Barbeau, 2016 WI App 51, 370 Wis. 2d 736, 883 N.W.2d 520, and it now rejects Paape’s arguments.
[5] Jessica E. Brown, Classifying Juveniles “Among the Worst Offenders”: Utilizing Roper v. Simmons to Challenge Registration and Notification Requirements for Adolescent Sex offenders, 39 STETSON L. REV. 369, 371 (Winter 2010).[6] Britney M. Bowater, Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006: Is there a better way to tailor the sentences of juvenile sex offenders?, 57 CATH. U. L. REV. 817 (Spring 2008).[7] U.S. CONST. AMEND. VIII (see also Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 568-75 (2005); Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010); Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012)). [8] Bowater at 819.
The Court has previously considered the Eighth Amendment’s applicability to juvenile offenders. In that respect, this post focuses on the juvenile-offender trifecta of Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012).In Roper, the Court addressed whether the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments permitted execution of a juvenile offender between the ages of 15 and 18 who committed a capital crime.
The Court has previously considered the Eighth Amendment’s applicability to juvenile offenders. In that respect, this post focuses on the juvenile-offender trifecta of Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012).In Roper, the Court addressed whether the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments permitted execution of a juvenile offender between the ages of 15 and 18 who committed a capital crime.
First, under Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 578 (2005), the Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendments “forbid imposition of the death penalty” on juvenile offenders. Next came Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 77 (2010), wherein the Court forbade imposition of life-without-parole on a “juvenile offender who did not commit homicide.” Third, in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. ____ (2012), the Court ruled that “mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment.”
Virginia v. Dennis LeBlanc, USSC No. 16-1177, 2017 WL 2507375 (June 12, 2017), reversingLeBlanc v. Mathena, 841 F.3d 256 (4th Cir. 2016); Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary)Although this is a per curiam decision and it’s decided under the rubric of federal habeas review, the upshot of this opinion is that states won’t have to do too much to satisfy the requirement under Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 75 (2010), that a state give a juvenile serving life without parole “some meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on a demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.”LeBlanc was sentenced to life without parole for a sexual assault he committed when he was 16.
First, under Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 578 (2005), the Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendments “forbid imposition of the death penalty” on juvenile offenders. Next came Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 77 (2010), wherein the Court forbade imposition of life-without-parole on a “juvenile offender who did not commit homicide.” Third, in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. ____ (2012), the Court ruled that “mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment.”
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). In Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), the Court barred life-without-release sentences for nonhomicide offenses. Next, in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), it struck down sentencing schemes that mandate life in prison without the possibility of release. Finally, Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016), held that Miller applies retroactively.
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), barred the death penalty for juvenile offenses. Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), barred life-without-release sentences for nonhomicide offenses. Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), struck down sentencing schemes that mandate life in prison without the possibility of release.