Youth Matters: Miller v. Alabama and the Future of Juvenile Sentencing

8 Pages Posted: 7 Feb 2014

See all articles by John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

University of Florida - Levin College of Law

Date Written: 2013

Abstract

In the Supreme Court's latest Eighth Amendment decision, Miller v. Alabama, the Court held that statutes authorizing mandatory sentences of life in prison with no possibility of parole are unconstitutional as applied to offenders who were under eighteen when they committed their crimes. This short essay examines several themes presented in Miller, including the constitutional significance of youth and science, the legitimacy of mandatory life sentences and juvenile transfer statutes, and the conflict between “evolving standards of decency” and the Supreme Court’s “independent judgment.”

This essay also introduces important articles by Richard Frase, Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker, Franklin Zimring and Stephen Rushin, Elizabeth Scott, Barry Feld, and Jeremiah Bourgeois. These articles were all contributions to the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law's symposium on Miller v. Alabama.

Keywords: Eighth Amendment, Cruel and Unusual, Juveniles, Juvenile Justice, Sentencing

Suggested Citation

Stinneford, John F., Youth Matters: Miller v. Alabama and the Future of Juvenile Sentencing (2013). Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2013. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2391407

John F. Stinneford (Contact Author)

University of Florida - Levin College of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 117625
Gainesville, FL 32611-7625
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
71
Abstract Views
760
rank
326,754
PlumX Metrics