Get 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... - Justia .com

Alabama. The court in Miller ruled that while sentences of life without parole were still permissible, they could only be imposed after judicial consideration of the individual circumstances and the court must consider the offender's maturity level.

The Court held that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment forbids the mandatory sentencing of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders.

Results. On June 25, 2012, in a 5-4 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders.

Title 2C - THE NEW JERSEY CODE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE.

The Miller ruling identified five factors to be considered in determining whether (with discretion) to impose a sentence of life without parole on a juvenile: the juvenile's age and immaturity; family home environment; circumstances of the offense, including the role the juvenile had in the offense and any influence of ...

Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court modifying its definition of obscenity from that of "utterly without socially redeeming value" to that which lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value".

Held: The judgment is affirmed. Affirmed. JUSTICE O'CONNOR, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE KENNEDY, concluded that Ewing's sentence is not grossly disproportionate and therefore does not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments.

Ewing was paroled in 1999, ten months before he stole the golf clubs from the pro shop in El Segundo. At sentencing on the golf club theft, the judge classified the 1993 burglaries and robbery as "two strikes" and imposed the 25-to-life sentence under California's three strikes law.