Sullivan v. Florida

  • March 11, 2010
    The practice of sentencing juvenile offenders of serious crimes to life in prison with no chance of parole is not effective and a different approach should be used, write the authors of a recent ACS Issue Brief. In "A Just Alternative to Sentencing Youth to Life in Prison Without the Possibility of Parole," Jody Kent, of the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth, and Beth Colgan, of the Institutions Project at Columbia Legal Services, write that no other country except America sentences juvenile offenders to life without the possibility of parole, a practice banned by the United Nations Convention for the Rights of the Child.

    The authors cite the significance of research showing that juvenile offenders should be treated differently than adults:

    Youth do not have adult levels of judgment, impulse control, or ability to assess risks. There is widespread agreement among child development researchers that young people who commit crimes are more likely to reform their behavior and have a better chance of rehabilitation than adults.

    The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering two cases involving the constitutionality of sentencing youth to life in prison without parole. Oral argument in Graham v. Florida and Sullivan v. Florida were heard in November and decisions in the cases are expected soon. For more on the constitutional issue in those cases, see a guest post from constitutional law expert Charles Ogletree here

  • November 9, 2009
    The Supreme Court heard oral argument in two Florida cases involving whether life sentences for juveniles, with no chance of parole, violate the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The Associated Press reports that the justices appear "sharply divided" over the issue. The news service notes that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that "because of immaturity, you can't really judge a teenager at the point of sentencing," but that Justice Samuel Alito seemed to side with Florida, which is arguing that that the juveniles' punishment does not raise constitutional concerns.

    In analysis for SCOTUSblog, Lyle Denniston writes that Chief Justice John Roberts "made a strong - and repeated - effort on Monday to recruit a majority of the Supreme Court in favor of giving juveniles more chance to use their age to challenge life-without-parole prison terms, as an alternative to a flat constitutional bar against ever imposing that sentence." Denniston explains that Roberts' "alternative would apparently be a declaration that the Constitution's Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment required judges to take the offender's youth into account in setting any sentence for term of years, then judge whether that sentence was ‘proportional' both for an offender of that age and for the particular crime."

    Sullivan v. Florida involves the sentence of Joe Sullivan, who as 13 when the state sentenced him for life without parole for a sexual assault conviction. Graham v. Florida involves Terrance Graham who was sentenced at 17 after violating his probation. The Washington Post reports that nationwide more than 100 people "are serving life sentences without parole for crimes they committed as juveniles that did not result in a death ...."

    In a guest post for ACSBlog, Harvard Law School Professor Charles Ogletree analyzed the cases and concluded, in part, that the Supreme Court should affirm its "reasoning put forth in Roper v. Simmons, which struck down capital punishment for juveniles. Roper established what every parent knows and what science confirms: adolescents are fundamentally different from adults in maturity and judgment." 

  • October 29, 2009
    Guest Post

    By Charles Ogletree, Jesse Climenko Professor of Law & Director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at is Harvard Law School. Ogletree submitted an Amicus brief in support of Petitioners with the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

    The United States Supreme Court will hold oral arguments on November 9 in two cases, Sullivan v. Florida and Graham v. Florida, which will determine whether it is cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to sentence an adolescent who committed a non-homicide offense to life in prison with no opportunity for release.

    Petitioners Joe Sullivan and Terrance Graham were both sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for offenses that did not involve homicide in Florida. Sullivan was 13 years old when he was sentenced to spend the remainder of his natural life in prison. Graham received life without parole for a parole violation at 17 years old. He was sentenced without a trial.

    Sullivan and Graham present an opportunity for the Court to affirm the reasoning put forth in Roper v. Simmons, which struck down capital punishment for juveniles. Roper established what every parent knows and what science confirms: adolescents are fundamentally different from adults in maturity and judgment.