Effective review of some state echoes of Eighth Amendment limits on extreme juve sentences

This new Law360 article, headlined “Appeals Courts Rethink Harsh Youth Sentences, Search Rules,” details some of the ways state courts have been extending the US Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence precluding some extreme juvenile sentence. Here are excerpts from the article:

Since the U.S. Supreme Court declared mandatory life without parole for those under 18 unconstitutional in 2012’s Miller v. Alabama, a growing number of state appeals courts have been reconsidering the most severe sentences for juveniles and young adults.  The movement stems from a growing acceptance of science showing human brain development and youthful impulsivity continue roughly until the age of 25 — long after legal adulthood.

“State courts are increasingly more likely to declare that extremely long prison terms [for young people over 18] violate the state constitution, even though they don’t violate the federal constitution,” said Kathrina Wolfkot, senior counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice and managing editor of its State Court Report publication. “That is probably the biggest trend that has emerged over the last few years, and that shows no signs of letting up.”

Michigan’s courts have led the pack so far this year, she said. The state’s movement on sentencing comes after Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court last year found life without parole to be unconstitutionally cruel or unusual punishment for defendants under 21 — laying out a gold standard for other states when it comes to sentencing caps for youths, according to Wolfkot….

But not all state appeals court decisions this year favored defendants convicted of serious crimes in their youth. The Illinois Supreme Court upheld the aggregate sentence of 100 years in prison for a man convicted of first-degree murder, attempted murder and home invasion. The defendant, Eugene Spencer, committed the crime when he was 20. The state’s high court found the sentence was not a de facto life sentence because Spencer would be eligible for parole review after serving at least 20 years of his sentence….

Wyoming’s high court is also considering the constitutionality of mandatory life without parole sentences for young adults in Christopher Robert Hicks v. The State of Wyoming.  Interestingly, this case highlights differences between the U.S. Constitution and the constitutions of Wyoming and some other states. While the U.S. Constitution forbids “cruel and unusual” punishment, Wyoming’s prohibits the more inclusive category of “cruel or unusual” punishment.

In Commonwealth v. Lee, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will decide whether it is constitutional to require life without parole for murder in commission of another felony. That charge is applied to defendants accused of participating in a felony that results in a homicide — even for defendants who did not directly cause the death. The case is of great interest because no state high court has ever found life without parole sentences for such convictions are unconstitutional, Wolfkot said. Oral arguments were held on Oct. 8, 2024, but the high court has yet to hand down a ruling.