Hi! Did you know your browser is outdated? For a more robust web experience we recommend using Safari, Firefox, Chrome or Opera.
CalBarScholarship2013_thumb
Two Students Receive California Bar Foundation Diversity ScholarshipsStory
Alyssa Bussey
Third-Year Student Externs with California Supreme Court Chief JusticeStory
Clay Logo Thumbnai
Four Alumni Honored as CA Attorneys of the YearStory
Fitzgerald
Paul J. Fitzgerald, S.J. Named President of the University of San FranciscoStory
Doris Cheng Story
Doris Cheng ’98 Named Director of Intensive Advocacy ProgramStory
Civil Rights News Thumb
Dean Trasviña Commemorates 50th Anniversary of Civil Rights ActStory
Scalia Podium
Justice Antonin Scalia and Bryan Garner Speak at USFStory
1Dollar Jacket
Faculty Book Offers Glimpse into Lives of the World’s PoorestStory

Post-Miller Cases

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that mandatory life without parole sentences are unconstitutional for juveniles under the age of 18 in the case Miller v. Alabama. This decision, along with the companion case Jackson v. Hobbs, comes on the heels of the 2008 decision in Graham v. Florida that forbid such a sentence for a non-homicide offense.

Mandatory sentences are available in 28 states and under Federal law, making a life-without-parole term mandatory for juveniles convicted of offenses in adult court without any consideration of the age of the offender, or other mitigating circumstances. Speaking for the majority, Justice Kagan wrote “mandatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age its hallmark features- among them, immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risks and consequences.”

The Supreme Court did not completely ban the possibility of juvenile life without parole, stating “although we do not foreclose a sentencer’s ability to make that judgment in homicide cases, we require it to take into account how children are different, and how those differences counsel against irrevocably sentencing them to a lifetime in prison.” Despite this, the majority noted that “we think appropriate occasions for sentencing juveniles to this harshest possible penalty will be uncommon.”

The procedures for bringing re-sentencing appeals post-Miller will be state specific. Please contact an attorney in your state for more information.

Some state specific legal resources are available here.

To determine if your state has mandatory sentencing, click here.

Read the full Miller v. Alabama and Jackson v. Hobbs opinion here