Chapter 11. Abolishing Sentences of Life Without Parole for Juvenile Offenders

2020 ◽  
pp. 222-244
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Annabel Mireles ◽  
Jacquline L. Cottle ◽  
Frank DiCataldo

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 613-645
Author(s):  
Anjelica Harris

In the words of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, children are different. The issue of how to sentence juvenile offenders has long been controversial. Although psychology acknowledges the connection between incomplete juvenile brain development and increased criminality, the justice system lags behind in how it handles juvenile offenders. A prime example is the case of Bobby Bostic, who at the age of sixteen was charged with eighteen offenses and sentenced to 241 years in prison. This sentence, known as a term-of-years or virtual life sentence, essentially guarantees that no matter what Bobby does or who he proves himself to be as an adult, he will die in prison. Since Bobby’s sentencing in 1997, the Supreme Court has held that sentencing juveniles to death violates the Eighth Amendment and has banned life without parole for juvenile offenders. Despite landmark Supreme Court decisions, a gap in the law continues to exist when it comes to juvenile non-homicide of- fenders who are certified and tried as adults. Thousands of juvenile offenders are now trapped in the legal gap that exists in the distinction, or lack thereof, between life without parole and lengthy term-of-years sentences. This Comment will explore the gap in the law, the various ways the States have chosen to handle this issue, and will propose a possible solution for Texas.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-104
Author(s):  
Jennifer Gongola ◽  
Daniel A. Krauss ◽  
Nicholas Scurich

Author(s):  
J. Anthony VanDuzer

SummaryRecently, there has been a proliferation of international agreements imposing minimum standards on states in respect of their treatment of foreign investors and allowing investors to initiate dispute settlement proceedings where a state violates these standards. Of greatest significance to Canada is Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which provides both standards for state behaviour and the right to initiate binding arbitration. Since 1996, four cases have been brought under Chapter 11. This note describes the Chapter 11 process and suggests some of the issues that may arise as it is increasingly resorted to by investors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document