Miller v. Alabama and and Jackson v. Arkansas Supreme Court Cases Essay Example

and drugs and had already tried to kill himself six times. On this day, he was at home with his friend Colby Smith.

The two boys accompanied Cannon to his trailer where they all played drinking games and smoked marijuana. Cannon passed out and Miller drew his wallet and took out $300. As he tried to return it, Cannon woke up and attacked him, but the boys struck Cannon with a bat and then tried to cover their crime by burning the trailer. The smoke eventually choked Cannon to death. The charges Miller faced were murder in the course of arson. He was charged as an adult. Accordingly, the minimum sentencing for such a crime then was life without parole, which Miller received. The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals verified the ruling, citing the nature of the crime as well as the fact that it was not unconstitutional and denied review.

Summary of the Procedural History

In the case of Jackson v. Arkansas, Jackson was charged with aggravated robbery and capital felony murder since Arkansas law allowed prosecutors the discretion to file adult charges against 14-year olds when alleged to have done certain grave crimes. Jackson tried to have his case transferred to a juvenile court, but his motion was denied, and an appellate court affirmed the denial after considering his arrest history, i.e. history of car theft and shoplifting, the facts alleged in the crime, as well as a psychiatrist’s examination. He was convicted of both crimes and sentenced to life without parole. He made no appeals, and the Arkansas Supreme Court confirmed the convictions.

Miller’s case, on the other hand, was removed from the juvenile court to

the adult court by the District Attorney after a hearing in the juvenile court, and the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals approved the decision, citing Miller’s previous juvenile offences (i.e. “criminal mischief” and truancy), the fact that he was mentally mature, as well as the nature of the offense. Consequently, Miller was charged with murder in the course of arson as an adult. The jury relied in significant part on Smith’s testimony, and Miller was sentenced to life without parole. The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals confirmed the ruling, citing the nature of the crime as well as the fact that it was not unconstitutional and denied review.

Statement of the Issue

Does mandatory life sentencing without parole for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment?

Summary of the Holding

The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, which guarantees persons the right not be placed under excessive sanctions. This right flows from the fundamental principle of justice in that punishment for offenses should be proportioned and graduated to both offense and the offender. The US Supreme Court resolved that life sentence with no parole for juveniles was unconstitutional for it violated the Eighth Amendment based on the fact that juveniles are less culpable and have greater prospects of reform as compared to adults and thus the penalty is overly severe to them.

The case of Graham v. Florida established the idea that kids differ constitutionally from adults because of their reduced culpability and greater prospects for reform. Graham, who was the petitioner in the case, had committed armed burglary together with another crime when at 16 years of age. The trial court sentenced him to probation and withheld a guilt judgment

under a plea agreement. However, Graham violated the conditions of his probation by committing more crimes. Consequently, the trial court judged Graham guilty of the initial charges, rescinded his probation, and gave him a life sentence without parole for the burglary. Although he challenged the sentence citing the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the State First District Court of Appeal confirmed it.

The US Supreme Court prohibited mandatory life sentences with no parole for juvenile offenders on account of three gaps between adults and juveniles. Firstly, is the idea that children lack maturity and their sense of responsibility is underdeveloped, which leads to heedless risk-taking, recklessness, and impulsivity. Secondly, is the notion that kids are more susceptible to outside pressures negative influences including from their peers and families as compared to adults. They have diminished control over their environment and do not have the power to remove themselves from dangerous, crime-producing situations. Thirdly, is the fact that the character of a child is not fully developed as that of the adult and his traits are not so much fixed; thus, his actions are less likely to be an indication of irreversible depravity. Consequently, the Supreme Court’s decision entitled both Miller and Jackson to new sentencing hearings.