ABSTRACT: Terence Graham has been sentenced to life in prison for home invasion and attempted robbery. He lost his case at the Florida First District Court of Appeal, but then later appealed to the federal United States court. He won his case at the supreme court and the court said that the ruling Graham was given was cruel and unusually. In the end Florida stated that a juvenile should serve life in prison only if convicted of murder.
At the age of 17 Terence Graham was sentenced was arrested for home invasion and attempted robbery. He was supposed to be sentence to life in prison, but he appealed to the federal court of the United States. He later won his case at the end and he did not receive the life in prison punishment. This case was
…show more content…
This whole case started when Terence Graham was convicted to home invasion and attempted robbery. He then was sentence to life in prison, but he appealed his sentence by the eight amendment. The eight amendment sates that a person has the right to be free from any cruel and unusually punishment. He said that his rights were violated because he was given a lifelong sentence for doing no homicidal crime and he was also under the age of 18 at the time. He then lost his appeal to the Florida First District Court of Appeal, but then he later made an appeal to the federal court of the United States in 2009. He won his case in the federal United States court the year later in 2010. In the end, most of the court said that the punishment was cruel and unusual for a minor to have. The case Graham vs Florida case has changed the juvenile justice system by passing a new law in the state of Florida in 2014. In the year 2014 the Florida Legislature has passed the chapter 2014-220 and this was to create a new resentencing scheme that went with Graham. (“Sheppard et al.”) They did this because the Florida courts wanted to implement Graham on their own. This also allowed any juvenile offender who has life sentences, to receive new sentencing
In my opinion, I actually agree with the court decision because yes although he did committed a crime, to be sentenced for life at young age is pretty harsh. I do agree that he should pay for his consequences but not to that extreme. They should honestly come up with a plan that suits his crime. Plus he has the right of the 8th Amendment, to not condone a cruel punishment if it does not suit the crime in which he committed.
In the case of 14 year old Timothy Kane a Florida teenager, reveals how youths can be hauled away for life, when the evidence shows he was just a tagging along with a group of friends
sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison. The case against him was largely
The Alan Gell case was in North Carolina where Alan was sentenced to the death penalty however after further investigation he was freed from determination as it was found that the prosecutors had withheld important evidence in the case. Its significance was that it led to new reforms in NC that requires all evidence, whether exculpatory or not, to be turned over as well as any complete files of all law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies involved in the
Heinous crimes are considered brutal and common among adults who commit these crimes, but among children with a young age, it is something that is now being counted for an adult trial and punishable with life sentencing. Although some people agree with this decision being made by judges, It is my foremost belief that juveniles don’t deserve to be given life sentencing without being given a chance at rehabilitation. If this goes on there’s no point in even having a juvenile system if children are not being rehabilitated and just being sent off to prison for the rest of their lives and having no chance getting an education or future. Gail Garinger’s article “ juveniles Don’t deserve Life sentence”, written March 14, 2012 and published by New york Times, mentions that “ Nationwide, 79 adolescents have been sentenced to die in prison-a sentence not imposed on children anywhere else in the world. These children were told that they could never change and that no one cared what became of them. They were denied access to education and rehabilitation programs and left without help or hope”. I myself know what it’s like to be in a situation like that, and i also know that people are capable of changing even children when they are young and still growing.
“Criminal Law and Procedure -Eighth Amendment- Juvenile Life Without Parole Sentences: Graham v. Florida” (2009) Harvard Law Review. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Apr. 2011.
Wood advocates that juveniles confined to adult prison are in danger and that they experience “significantly higher rates of physical assault, sexual abuse, and suicide, than their counterparts in juvenile facilities.” (para. 1). Wood’s case study presents facts that substantiate negligence regarding the safety and well-being of youths in prison.
In the article On Punishment and Teen Killers by Jenkins, sadly brings to our attention that kids are sometimes responsible for unimaginable crimes, in 1990 in a suburban Chicago neighborhood a teenager murdered a women, her husband, and her unborn child, as she begged for the life of her unborn child he shot her and later reported to a close friend that it was a “thrill kill”, that he just simply wanted to see what it felt like to shoot someone. A major recent issue being debated is whether or not we have the right to sentence Juveniles who commit heinous crimes to life in adult penitentiaries without parole. I strongly believe and agree with the law that states adolescents who commit these heinous crimes should be tried as adults and sentenced as adults, however I don’t believe they should be sentenced to life without parole. I chose this position because I believe that these young adults in no way should be excused for their actions and need to face the severe consequences of their actions. Although on the other hand I believe change is possible and that prison could be rehabilitating and that parole should be offered.
“Prison is no place for anybody to start off at. This is where everybody ends up and they end up being a loser in life. This is where the ball game begins and only the tough survive” (“Prison”). There are approximately 2,500 prisoners serving life without parole sentences for homicide committed when they were under the age 18. More than 2,000 of them received that sentence as a result of a mandatory sentencing scheme (“US”). State laws call for a mandatory sentence of life without parole for those convicted of a felony murder. However, the Supreme Court ruled in June 2012 that mandatory life sentences without parole for juveniles is unconstitutional. To sentence a minor to life in prison is unjust because people under the age of eighteen do not fully comprehend the consequences of their actions, exposure to violence as a child influences their actions, and they are not legal adults and should not be held liable for adult consequences.
Children as young as thirteen years old are being tried as adults and sentenced to die in prison. You may ask, “Doesn't that seem a bit too extreme?” Nevertheless, the sentencing does is not nearly as extreme when compared to the crime committed. In one case three of five Florida teenagers, Denver Jarvis (15), Michael Bent (15) and Jesus Mendez (16), were accused of setting Michael Brewer (15) on fire over a $40 video game debt. The boys left young Brewer with severe burns over, what reporters claim to be, 65 percent of his body. These three boys attempted a harsh felony, second degr...
Which punishment is crueler, life in prison or the death penalty? This is an issue that many politicians and the average individual debate regularly. The death penalty is the more controversial of the two because the end result is the death of an individual; to many, no one deserves that even when considering their crimes, but to others those individuals got what they “deserved”. Robert Glen Jones Jr., a Caucasian male at the age of 43, was executed about a month ago on October 23, 2013 after being convicted on six counts of first–degree murder, which resulted in the death of seven individuals. Jones is one of 36 inmates in Arizona to have been executed sine 1992, but also another interesting piece to the provocative death penalty subject (Kiefer).
It is expected that at a young age, children are taught the difference between what is right and what is wrong in all types of situations. The majority of Supreme Court Justices abolished mandatory life in prison for juveniles that commit heinous crimes, argued this with the consideration of age immaturity, impetuosity, and also negative family and home environments. These violent crimes can be defined as murder, rape, armed robbery, aggravated assault and the like depending on state law. With these monstrous acts in mind the supreme court justices argument could be proven otherwise through capability and accountability, the underdevelopment of the teenage brain and the severity of the crime. Juveniles commit heinous crimes just like adults
Prior to 1899, in the United States, child offenders over the age of seven were imprisoned in the same facilities as adult offenders. As a result of political and social reformers, society’s views on juvenile justice began to shift to a more sympathetic view. Beginning in 1899, individual states began to address the youth incarceration problem by establishing youth reform homes, the predecessor to juvenile dentition centers. The objective of these homes was the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders for their re-entry into society and for the greater good. However, in recent years, many have argued that juveniles charged with violent felonies ought to be treated as adults; while others argue its antithesis. In 2005, Kirk Gunderson (17) committed suicide while incarcerated in an adult jail. His mother, Vicky Gunderson, explained to a researcher on youth justice how her son was sexually assaulted and involved in physical confrontations. He was placed in confinement where he was left for two and a-half hours by himself. Once the guards came back, Kirk was found dead hanging by a blanket from a smoke detector. It is upsetting to many to read cases like Kirk’s but it poses a question; could this act of violence been avoided?
Is it fair to give juveniles life sentences? On June 25 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, stated that “Mandatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age and its hallmark features- among them, immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate the risks and consequences. It prevents taking into account the family and home environment that surrounds him and from which he cannot usually extricate himself no matter how brutal or dysfunctional.” Juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison or adult jail until legal age. Due to the facts that many are still young and aren’t over eighteen.
The article titled “Growing up in Prison” by Elizabeth Calvin was published in the Los Angeles Times on January 13 2014. It discusses the case of Eden Gonzalez who was sentenced to life imprisonment at the age of sixteen. Gonzales sentence was punitive owing to the lack of parole for the entire sentence. This is because the inmate tried to steal a car in the company of two adults, but a murder occurred in the course of the crime. It is notable that Gonzales was sentenced to a life imprisonment despite the fact that he did not kill. In an online article by Ashley Hayes, the author discusses the case of Ethan Couch who was driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.24. The judge ruled for Couch to serve ten-year probation despite the fact that Couch killed. This paper argues that even though the law promotes a fair society, a person’s economic status can influence their jail sentence. Is also opposes life imprisonment without parole for children.