Harsh Punishments for Harsher Juveniles

The following document has been sent by Daniel Ayala at APOLLO GROUP INC. via ProQuest, an information service of ProQuest LLC. Please do not reply directly to this email. | news paper| | Documents| * | PAUL PINKHAM. (2009, September 24). State plans push for harsher terms JUVENILES Two cases from North Florida are headed for the Supreme Court. Florida Times Union,B. 1. Retrieved December 19, 2009, from Business Dateline. (Document ID: 1866348441). | | ! All documents are reproduced with the permission of the copyright owner.

Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission. | | Citation style: APA | ! Attention: Ensure the accuracy and completeness of your bibliography. Click here to view instructions. In particular, the formatting of author names and dates might need to be corrected. | | Document 1 of 1 | PAUL PINKHAM. (2009, September 24). State plans push for harsher terms JUVENILES Two cases from North Florida are headed for the Supreme Court. Florida Times Union,B. 1. Retrieved December 19, 2009, from Business Dateline. (Document ID: 1866348441). Abstract (Summary) [… ] his sentence is not disproportionate. Full Text (527  words)| Copyright Florida Times Union Sep 24, 2009 Sentencing juveniles as adults is an appropriate way to fight crime and is for Florida lawmakers, not federal courts, to decide, state lawyers will argue when the U. S. Supreme Court considers the issue in a Jacksonville case in November. The state’s position, outlined in a 63-page brief by the Florida Attorney General’s Office, is bolstered by organizations who filed seven supporting briefs in Washington this week.

They include a coalition of victims groups, the National District Attorneys Association and 19 other state attorneys general, all opposing a Jacksonville inmate who is challenging life prison sentences without parole for juveniles convicted of non-homicides. The Supreme Court agreed in May to hear arguments in two North Florida cases to decide whether life without parole for juveniles in non-homicides is unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment. One case involves Terrance Jamar Graham, now 22, who was 16 when he committed an armed burglary in Jacksonville.

He initially received probation but was sentenced to life for violating its terms by committing a series of armed robberies. The other appellant is Joe Sullivan, who was 13 when he raped a woman in Pensacola 20 years ago. Many of the arguments advanced by lawyers for Graham and Sullivan track the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision to abolish the death penalty for juveniles. They contend juveniles aren’t mentally developed enough to appreciate the consequences of their actions, that life sentences for juveniles are disproportionate and that they violate international law.

In the state brief, Florida Solicitor General Scott Makar argues that the courts have always distinguished between the death penalty and, outside the 2005 opinion, have never exempted an entire class of people from a sentencing provision. There is no legal basis for a constitutional ban on life sentences for juveniles. “Particularly heinous acts that stop short of causing death or a series of escalating violent acts justify long-term sentences for juveniles,” wrote Makar, set to argue both cases before the high court Nov. 9.

Additionally, Makar argued states have the right to establish their own sentencing laws, and a decision in Graham’s favor would undo that right and hamper judicial discretion. He said Florida has deliberate and focused policies on when juveniles can be sentenced as adults, which take into account maturity and mental development. Many of those were developed in the 1990s in response to a skyrocketing juvenile crime rate and have been effective at lowering that rate, he wrote. “Like most states, only the most serious juvenile offenders, who have emonstrated criminal maturity beyond their years either by committing extremely serious offenses or by repeating their criminal conduct, are eligible for adult sanctions,” Makar wrote. In Graham’s case, Makar noted that he squandered a second chance and his life sentence followed a series of hearings after which a judge determined Graham was incapable of being rehabilitated. “Though Graham’s punishment is harsh, it is imposed on numerous juvenile and adult offenders in Florida and is not unlike many other sentences permitted in a majority of states,” Makar wrote. Consequently, his sentence is not disproportionate. ” He contended that consideration of international law in a local sentencing dispute is unwarranted. paul. [email protected] com, (904) 359-4107 [

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *