Miller v. Alabama, 567 US 460 - Supreme Court 2012

—the Supreme Court held that "mandatory life without parole for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on `cruel and unusual punishment.'"

—the Court held that the Eighth Amendment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without possibility of parole for juvenile offenders.

I recognize that Miller does not categorically bar life without the possibility of parole for juvenile offenders.

In Miller, the Supreme Court held that "mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment."

The Supreme Court noted that its cases have also "emphasized that the distinctive attributes of youth diminish the penological justifications for imposing the harshest sentences on juvenile offenders, even when they commit terrible crimes."

—homicide offense, including the extent of his participation in the conduct and the way familial and peer pressures may have affected him. Indeed, it ignores that he might have been charged and convicted of a lesser offense if not for incompetencies associated with youth—for example, his inability to deal with police officers or prosecutors (including on a plea agreement) …

He points to two Supreme Court cases that restricted states' ability to impose life-withoutparole sentences on juvenile offenders.

Nevertheless, the court did not, as the Supreme Court mandated in Miller, "take into account how children are different, and how those differences counsel against irrevocably sentencing them to a lifetime in prison