Introduction to forensic psychology concepts and applications

Psychology - Intro to Forensics Psych Discussion Post

Graham v. Florida

In Graham v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the question of whether it constituted cruel and unusual punishment to sentence a juvenile to a life sentence for a non-homicidal crime. The individual t in question was a sixteen-year-old who had grown up in poverty to parents who were addicted to crack and (unsurprisingly) the convicted Graham had difficulties resisting the pull of drugs himself. With three other boys, Graham committed burglary and assault. He was sentenced to concurrent 3-year terms of probation after making a statement to the court that he was going to turn his life around. Within six months, he had already been arrested again for a violent burglary (Graham v. Florida, 2010, Cornell Law School).

The principles of the juvenile justice system are somewhat different from those of the adult justice system. While the adult justice system assumes a certain degree of independence and responsibility on the part of a competent adult, the juvenile justice system primarily has a rehabilitative function. This is why juvenile records are expunged; why juveniles are often assigned lesser sentences than adults, and also why certain crimes known as status offenses are crimes only if committed by juveniles -- young defendants are viewed as intrinsically 'different' than adults.

Graham was sentenced to life in prison after he violated the terms of his parole, a sentence which he appealed. The U.S. Supreme Court found in favor of Graham, stating that there must be some realistic ability for a convicted juvenile to obtain parole for a non-homicide crime, given the principles of the juvenile justice system. The court cited consensus both amongst other states and the international community against such harsh, permanent sentences upon juveniles for non-homicides. This made Graham's punishment a violation of the 8th Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.

Graham was consistent with a general trend exhibited by the court to create a more clear differentiation between appropriate juvenile vs. adult sentencing. For example, in Roper v. Simmons (2005) the court declared the death penalty unconstitutional for persons under 18 (Guggenheim 2012: 3). However, the Graham decision was considered more surprising because the Court tends to give more consideration to death penalty cases. There is often great variation between juvenile laws between the states, but rather than defer to a growing trend to emphasize states' rights, the Graham decision emphasized evolving national and international standards of decency. According to Justice Kennedy, regardless of the state in which the juvenile is tried, there must be a general acknowledgement that juveniles have a "lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility...are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure; and their characters are not as well formed" as adults (Guggenheim 2012:5).