Brendan Wang
Professor Ashkettle
AP Government Period 5
3 November 2017
The Roper v. Simmons Civil Liberties Case As children, we have all stepped that “boundary” between right and wrong. From stealing money to shoplifting to fighting, we have all made our parents frustrated, made poor decisions, and perhaps, even made a egregious mistake. However, when does stepping that “boundary” become irremediable? Can the government punish minors under the same criteria they do with adults? And most importantly, what does the United States Constitution say? These are all questions that both the Missouri Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court had to consider when they dived into the case of Roper v. Simmons. To provide a little historical
…show more content…
Roper, the sentencing of minors would be legal, constitutional and uphold Stanford v. Kentucky; conversely, if the court ruled in favor of the defendant Christopher Simmons, the death sentence of both Simmons and all future juvenile convicts would be considered “cruel and unusual” according to the Eighth Amendment and effectively overturn Stanford v. Kentucky. The big day was March 1st, 2005. The verdict was reached and the decisions were made in the Rehnquist Court. The Chief Justice William Rehnquist ruled against Simmons, the defendant. Being a strict constructionist, or one that strictly adheres to the Constitution, this decision was consistent with his beliefs because nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the execution of minors is a cruel or unusual punishment. He reasoned that it was justified based on the defendant’s actions. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor is also a strict constructionist, believing in loyalty to the original Constitution and also in judicial restraint, where she tends to support previous judicial rulings. In this case, she was somewhat consistent, since she voted against Simmons as well and voted to uphold the previous ruling (Stanford v. Kentucky), which ruled that the death sentence of minors was permissible. In fact, she even responded to the argument that many international laws have denounced execution of minors and death penalty in general by stating that international law should have no relevance on the supreme law of the United
The court decision was influenced by Graham and Roper cases that established for sentencing reasons children are different from adults under the constitution. Children lack maturity and have no developed sense of responsibility. This leads them to be impulsive and reckless. In Roper it was held children are exposed to outside pressure and negative influences from friends. Therefore, they have less control of their environment because the child’s nature is not2 well informed. Graham and Roper emphasized distinguishing traits of children weakening justification for inflicting harsh sentences to juveniles even when they commit outrageous crimes.
Christopher Simmons, who was seventeen years old, and two of his friends by the name of Charles Benjamin(fifteen years old) and John Tessmer (sixteen years old) had a detailed conversation about committing a murder. Christopher Simmons had a premeditated plan to which included, burglary (breaking and entering), robber and
The role of the Judicial Branch of the United States has been the most dynamic throughout the Nation’s history. By adopting the power of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, the Supreme Court established its position as being arguably the most powerful branch of Federal Government. However, this also made the Judiciary’s role the most controversial. Should the Court be required to interpret the constitution strictly through the language it contains? Does the Court have the right to overturn morals legislation? Through analyzing court cases like Lawrence v. Texas, one can gain insight on the role of the Supreme Court and how it fits within the confines of the United States Government.
In 1988 the case of Thompson v. Oklahoma it claimed that the Constitution prohibits execution for crimes committed at age 15. The outcome of the decision was that a State’s execution of a juvenile who had committed a capital offense prior to age 16 violated Thompson unless the State had a minimum age limit in its death penalty. (2) The court decided that juveniles younger than 16 when they committed a crime may not be executed. Wayne Thompson is serving a life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole. Another case in the juvenile death penalty cases is Atkins v. Virginia; The U.S. Supreme Court banned the execution of mentally retarded persons in 2002. Justices ruled that executing mentally retarded criminals violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The most important
Christopher Simmons was charged with burglary and the murder of Shirley Crook. He and his two friends plotted to break into her home rob and murder her. One of his friends decided not to go through with the plot, but his other friend helped. They went in the middle of the night into her home bound her and threw her over the bridge. At trial with the evidence, videotaped confession from Simmons, and the testimony against him from his friend proving that it was a premeditated plan the jury recommended a death sentence. He appealed his case with counsel and felt his past history of a clean record and his troubled background should have been a factor in the sentencing. Simmons’s case worked its way to the courts and it was eventually overturned. According to Birckhead (2008), “With its decision in Roper v. Simmons,11 invalidating the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were younger than eighteen when their crimes were committed,12 the Court has, perhaps, heralded yet another shift in the perspective of the legal system-and the culture at large-towards adolescents who commit crimes”(p.389). The Supreme Court ruled that the punishment now violates the Eighth Amendment 's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Thus, they sentenced Simmons to life imprisonment without parole.
Through cases such as Roper v. Simmons we are able to acknowledge and see the motions that bring juveniles into committing crime. Not only through his case but through research it is noted that that maturity/ brain development, peer influence/pressure, communication with parents, social differences, and insufficient education has a high leverage on the existence of juvenile crime. Christopher Simmons at 17 murdered Shirley Crook and was initially sentenced to death.
The case of Kusmider v. State, 688 P.2d 957 (Alaska App. 1984), was a state appeal’s court case that addressed the chain of causation for a murder, which had occurred, and the actions of the trial court judge (Brody & Acker, 2010). In this case, the appellant, Kusmider, appealed his conviction for second degree murder, based on the fact that the trial judge did not let him introduce evidence, which may have shown that the victim may have survived his wounds, if not for the actions of the paramedics.
In the Case of Missouri v. Seibert, a mother named Patrice Seibert was convicted of second degree murder. Patrice Seibert had a son named Jonathan who was twelve years old and had cerebral palsy. Jonathan Seibert suddenly died in his sleep, and his mother thought that she would be held responsible for his sudden death. Ms. Seibert then devised a plan with her two older sons and their friends. She wanted to cover up the death of Jonathan, so she conspired with her sons and their friends to cover up the death by burning down their mobile home. Donald Rector was a mentally ill individual who stayed with the Seibert’s and later died as the home went up in flames. Several days later, Seibert was taken into the police station and questioned about the mysterious mobile home fire. While being interrogated, the officer waved Ms. Seibert’s Miranda rights. She was questioned for thirty to forty minutes before she was given a break. While being questioned, the officer hoped that Ms. Seibert would voluntarily confess to the crimes that had taken place. After her break, she was then questioned a second time. This time, the officer turned on a recorder and then read Ms. Seibert her Miranda Warnings, and the officer also obtained a signed waiver of rights from Seibert.
There are many controversial issues in our world today, and each of those issues is well debated by people who either support it or absolutely loathe it. One of those highly debated controversial issues is the juvenile death penalty. Since the Roper v. Simmons case in 2005, sentencing juveniles to death is considered illegal on the grounds that it violates the Eighth Amendment rights (Babcock 6). Although it is considered illegal in the United States, it is still a highly debated problem. There are people that believe the juvenile death penalty is an effective punishment and should not be illegal. On the other hand, many believe that the juvenile death penalty is an extreme punishment and should not be an option when it comes to sentencing juveniles. With such a critical issue, it is only considered fair to understand both sides opinions about the juvenile death penalty.
Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is
The Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States of America. With this title they have the final say about the decisions for the country. However the Supreme Court can make mistakes and have so before. The case considered the worst Supreme Court decision among many scholars is the Dred Scott V. Sanford case from the pre-civil war era. In which time slavery was a very hot topic between the states. In this case it was determined that a slave was not only not a citizen of the United States but also property (our documents). This court ruling made useless of the Missouri compromise of 1850 which made states above the 36°30’ line Free states and all below the line slaves states (History). This decision was eventually overturned by the Civil War amendments the 13th and 14th which stated that slavery is illegal in all states not only ones in rebellion and that all people born in the united states are citizens including people of color (our documents).
The constitutionality of the juvenile death penalty reached a settlement in 1988 in the case of Thompson v. Oklahoma when four Supreme Court Justices reached the conclusion that: persons under sixteen years of age cannot be sentenced to death (Thompson v. Oklahoma, 1988). Justice Stevens, Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun considered these important issues as they were deliberating on the case: (1) Does a national consensus forbidding executions of juveniles exist?; (2) the extent to which the laws of other Western European nations prohibit or permit the execution of juveniles, and the opinions of " respected professional organizations;" (3) the degree to which the juveniles should be held responsible for their actions; (4) Whether the execution of juveniles contributed to the retributive or deterrent goals of punishment; and (5) Whether the small number of juveniles executed represents the "waton and freakish" application of the death penalty as condemned by Justice Stewart in Furman V. Georgia (Furman v. Georgia, 1972: 2763, Thompson v. Oklahoma, 1988: 487 U.S. 815). Following the decision, thirty eight states and the federal government created statutes authorizing the death penalty for certain forms of murder and other capital offenses ( Streib 1 of 2). Thompson v. Oklahoma held that no state within the minimum age line within its death penalty can go below the age of sixteen. Presently, fifteen states have chosen the min age of eighteen, four states have chosen
Bound v. Smith was a North Carolina case that was filed by three (3) inmates against state administrators under section 1983,1. The facts of the case alleged that the inmates has been deprived of access to the courts in violation of their fourteen (14th) amendment rights by the state’s failure to provide legal research facilities (Shaw, 1978).
John Roberts who is the chief justice agreed that the first sentencing was unconstitutional to the crime, but it also allowed points to be made in other rulings. This case has allowed others like Graham to be resentenced and as well allowed individuals to have a chance of being released. It was also mentioned that age can impact the outcome of the trial because if it isn't taken into consideration then. This now impacts future cases because children are seen as different, in their case they could be saved and have a chance to turn their life around. This will also determine how the courts see criminals in the future because of how the supreme court has said the sentence life in prison is unconstitutional to
The inception of the adolescent framework law has since quite a while ago characterized a line in the middle of adolescent and grown-up wrongdoers, yet that line has been drawn at better places, for diverse reasons. Amid the nineteenth century, the treatment of adolescents in the United States began to change. Social reformers started to make extraordinary offices for vexed adolescents, particularly in vast urban communities. We can ascribe the genuine starting to William Blackstone, an English Lawyer in the 1760 's who created basic law in England. “British lawyer William Blackstone proposed the idea that at a certain age, individuals were incapable of committing crime Blackstone introduced a defining line between the stage of infancy (anyone under the age of seven) and adulthood (anyone under the age of fourteen) (Downey, N.D). He accepted that there were two things that were needed with a specific end goal to consider somebody responsible for their activities. The main thing was "horrible will," aim to perpetrate the wrongdoing. Another thing was the activity; they really perpetrated the wrongdoing. On the off chance that both of the two was needing, then the individual carried out no wrongdoing. Between the ages of seven and fourteen was a hazy area. A youngster in this age reach would be assumed unequipped for wrongdoing. In the event that, notwithstanding, it created the impression that the youngster comprehended the contrast in the middle of good and bad, the kid