Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
When a lawyer who has never been disciplined represents a juvenile, chances of accepting a plea are high. This is because the lawyer is likely to negotiate for a lesser sentence (Grigorenko, 2012).
The current juvenile court system allows youth offenders to be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. This is like declaring these youths as people who are irredeemable. Evidently, youths have the capability to change. Moreover, a system that allows them to change must be set up by considering their age. Children cannot be compared to adults, thus must be treated in a context that holds young people accountable. In the article, experts are urging lawmakers to review the life without parole sentence given to juveniles such that it should allow public hearings after every four years. In addition, they support parole procedures to be reviewed for youth offenders serving life imprisonment (Sarat, 2009).
It is extremely unusual and cruel to give a mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, to a juvenile. This decision has followed decisions made by other courts that have reduced punishments given to youth offenders. However, it seems that this case is different. Such punishment had been prohibited by previous cases under any circumstances. It is impossible to have a mandatory sentence. In a case involving a 12-year-old who had been sentenced to a mandatory life imprisonment: the Supreme Court ruled out that the sentence was unconstitutional. Further, other cases had indicated that according to the constitution, children are different form adults concerning sentencing. Youths have great...
This is violating the constitution because it says that severe penalties should not be imposed on juveniles because they are children. This means that the mandatory life imprisonment of juveniles without an opportunity for parole has been forbidden. Imposition of a death penalty on crimes committed by juveniles is unusual and cruel. The government should never impose life imprisonment without parole on youth offenders. It is unconstitutional to impose a death sentence in any circumstance, to a crime committed by a juvenile. Rather, the courts should hold such sentences, but it should not be mandatory. This will require changes in the juvenile court system and resolve the prevailing difficulties. First, the prosecutors must advocate for a sentence of life imprisonment with parole for crimes committed by juveniles (Sarat, 2009).
References
Grigorenko, E. (2012). Handbook of Juvenile Forensic Psychology and Psychiatry. California:
Springer
Researcher CQ (2011). Childhood and Adolescence in Society: Selections from CQ Researcher.
New York: SAGE
Juvenile delinquency has been an ever-evolving issue in the United States. From aims focused on prevention and rehabilitation that resulted in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974; to a reverse trend beginning in the mid-1970's, the present has brought on a more prevalent tendency to try juveniles as adults. No more have courts taken to giving juveniles delinquents a second chance through rehabilitation (Schmalleger, 2016). In recent
Juvenile offenders have grown to become a serious problem in many countries, especially the United States. Like adult offenders, juvenile offenders are more likely to reoffend, especially without the proper guidance and assistance they need in order to live a law abiding life. Research within the last five years has led to identification of specific program models as well theory-based intervention approaches that not only assist juvenile offenders in leading
Juvenile Offenders, an Intervention Analysis The challenge of juvenile offenders, what prompts them into crime and what factors contribute to the repeat of same misdemeanors that led them to the juvenile prison are issues that have for long attracted protracted discussions and even detailed researches. There has been little attention however given to the possible role of mentor programs in keeping the young people off crime. This research proposal hence looks
Missouri has seen a rise in African-America juveniles tried as adults. Statistics from 2009 state 64% of the juveniles tried as adults were of African-American descent. This is almost double of the amount in 2001 which was 36%. (Cooper) This brings to light an increase in racial disparity and the nature of prosecution in Missouri. Many of the cases of the African-American juvenile offenders certified as adults are prosecuted in
Relevance Juvenile offenders and reoffenders are an important problem facing the United States criminal justice system. For more than one hundred years, states held the belief that the juvenile justice system acted as a vehicle to safeguard the public via offering a structure that enables the rehabilitation of children growing into adulthood. States identified the difference of children committing crimes versus adult offenders (Loeber & Farrington, 2012). For example, the states
Juvenile Justice Xander, an Illinois Juvenile Criminal Justice Case Study The Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA, 2012) operates under a statutory mandate to improve the administration of the criminal justice system in the State of Illinois. In order to perform this function the agency must be aware of all the operational details related to the Illinois juvenile criminal justice system (ICJIA, n.d.). The Illinois juvenile criminal justice system consists of