Is it wrong to try juveniles as adults in a court of law? The purpose of this research paper is to get a better understanding of how and when juveniles are tried as adults. Across the country, the laws concerning juveniles being tried as adults vary by state. For example, the juvenile sentencing laws in New Hampshire are very different from a state such as Texas or Florida. The Supreme Court ruled in June 2012, that juveniles convicted of murder cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Twenty nine states currently have laws such as that. (Rovner, 2018)
The history of the debate around the sentencing of juveniles spans back all the way to 1786. In 1786 a twelve year old girl named Hannah Occuish, was hanged in New London, Connecticut. She was accused of murdering a six year old girl who had came from a wealthy family. Hannah was a Pequot Indian who was believed to have had an intellectual disability. It is believed that an argument over some strawberries led to the killing. In 1927, Fortune Ferguson was the youngest person to have been executed in the 20th century. He was thirteen years old when he was executed in Florida by means of electrocution, for the rape of an eight year old girl. In 1977 the Supreme Court in Coker v. Georgia outlawed execution for rape. (Pace, 2016)
In 1989, with the case of Stanford v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court established the minimum age for execution at sixteen years of age. Seventeen year old Kevin Stanford was convicted by a Kentucky jury of robbery, sodomy, murder, and the receipt of stolen property. Under a state statute which permitted juvenile offenders to receive the death penalty for Class A felonies or capital crimes, Stanford was sentenced to death. The sentence was appealed by Stanford, and his case was consolidated with the case of Wilkins v. Missouri. In Wilkins v. Missouri, a sixteen year old boy was appealing his sentence of death after being convicted of first degree murder in a convenience store robbery. Both Wilkins and Stanford alleged that imposing the death penalty on offenders as young as they were violated their constitutional rights.
The first case in relation to the research topic, is Miller v. Alabama from 2012. In the summer of 2003, Evan Miller, along with Colby Smith, beat Cole Cannon with a baseball bat and burned his trailer while he was inside. Miller was only 14 years old when this incident took place. In 2004, he was transferred from Lawrence County Juvenile Court to the County Circuit court where he would be tried as an adult for capital murder and arson. In 2006, Miller was indicted by a grand jury who found him guilty. He was sentenced to a mandatory term of life in prison without the possibility of parole. A post trial motion was filed by Miller’s attorney asking for a new trial. Their argument was that sentencing a 14 year old to life without parole violated the eighth amendment, directly referring to cruel and unusual punishment. The motion was denied by the trial court. An appeal was filed and heard by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, who confirmed the lower court’s decision. (Oyez, 2018)
The second case relating to the topic was Stanford v. Kentucky from 1989. Seventeen year old Kevin Stanford was convicted by a Kentucky jury of murder, sodomy, robbery, and the receipt of stolen property. A death sentence was given to Stanford under a state statute that permitted juvenile offenders to receive the death penalty for Class A felonies or capital crimes. The sentence was appealed by Stanford and his case was consolidated with Wilkins v. Missouri. That case involved a sixteen year old’s appeal of his death sentence following a first degree murder conviction. Both offenders alleged that the imposition of the death penalty on offenders as young as them violated their constitutional rights. (Oyez, 2018)
The third case relating to the research question is Roper v. Simmons from 2005. Christopher Simmons was sentenced to death at the age of 17 in 1993 for the murder of Shirley Crook. Simmons and two other friends, who were also juveniles, made a plan to murder Shirley Crook. They were planning on committing burglary and murder by means of breaking and entering. Simmons and his two friends had met in the middle of the night but one of Simmons’ friends, John Tessmer, dropped out of the plan. Simmons and his other friend, Charles Benjamin, broke into Shirley Crook’s house, tied her up and covered her eyes (Blanco, 2008). After Simmons and Benjamin had bound Crook, they put her in their car, where they drove to a state park and threw her off of a bridge. Simmons was charged with murder, burglary and kidnapping. The only thing that Simmons and Benjamin stole from Crook was six dollars. At the trial, the evidence against Simmons was substantially overwhelming. Simmons had confessed to the murder and John Tessmer, the one who dropped out of the plot, testified against Simmons in court, also proving premeditation. Simmons had discussed the plan in advance and also bragged about it afterwards. Even considering that Simmons had no prior criminal history, the jury found him guilty and recommended a death sentence which the trial court held up. (Oyez, 2018)
Simmons appealed his sentence to state and federal courts until 2002, but was rejected in every single one. However, in 2002, Simmons’ execution was stayed by the Missouri Supreme Court while the United States Supreme Court heard the case of Atkins v. Virginia. That case dealt with the execution of the mentally disabled. The U.S. Supreme Court decided that executing the mentally violated the eighth and fourteenth amendments, referring to cruel and unusual punishment. Since the majority of Americans deemed Simmons’ punishment to be cruel and unusual, the Missouri Supreme Court decided to reconsider Simmons’ case. The Missouri Supreme Court decided, 6-3, that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Stanford v. Kentucky, (as mentioned earlier) which held that executing minors was not unconstitutional, was no longer valid. The Missouri Supreme Court decided that the national opinion on the death penalty had changed. A majority of Americans were now opposed to the execution of minors, resulting in the court deciding that these executions were now unconstitutional. (CLI, 2018)
The fourth case that related to the research question was Graham v. Florida, which was settled in 2010. In this case, sixteen year old Terrance Graham was convicted of armed burglary and attempted armed robbery. Graham served a twelve month sentence and was then released. However, six months later, Graham was tried and convicted by Florida State Court of armed home robbery and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. He appealed, and argued that being given a life sentence without parole as a juvenile, violated the Eighth Amendment. This constituted cruel and unusual punishment, thus being in direct violation of the Eighth Amendment. The District Court of Appeal of Florida happened to disagree though. They held that Graham’s sentence did not violate the Eighth Amendment or constitute cruel and unusual punishment (Oyez, 2018).
Sentencing a juvenile who did not commit murder to life without parole was extremely rare and the community came out against it. None of the recognized goals of penal sanctions such as retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation, provided an adequate justification for the sentence (Nexus Uni, 2010). But, it could not be determined at the time of sentencing that the juvenile defendant would be a danger to society. A sentence of life without parole denied the juvenile a chance to prove their maturity, growth, and rehabilitation.
Over the years, the general consensus on juvenile sentencing has drastically changed. It began with anybody over the age of twelve being executed for crimes that the general public felt was heinous enough. Now in 2018, it is illegal for juveniles to be executed, and very few states allow juveniles to be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.