Supreme Court Considers Life Sentences For Juveniles
Christopher Weber
In 2005, the justices ruled it unconstitutional to execute juveniles who had committed murder.
The high court heard two cases Monday from Florida, The Washington Post reported. One concerns Terrance Graham, who was given a life sentence without parole at age 17 after violating probation on an armed robbery charge.
The other case involves Joe Harris Sullivan, who is one of only two 13-year-olds in the U.S. sentenced to life without parole for a non-homicide. Now 34, Sullivan was convicted of raping an elderly woman. His lawyers are asking that Sullivan be re-sentenced, so that he can eventually appeal for release to a state parole board.
A number of organizations support Sullivan and Graham, including the American Bar Association, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and many academics and social scientists. They say juveniles cannot be held responsible for their actions in the same way that adults are. They say that's why teenagers are not allowed to vote, get married or drink alchohol.
Florida and 19 other states insist they should retain the right to decide the proper way to sentence those who commit crimes, regardless of age.
"There is no consensus against life sentences for juveniles, particularly for heinous crimes such as sexual battery," Florida Solicitor General Scott Makar told the court in the state's brief.