« Three Justices dissent from denial of certiorari in Jones/Ball acquitted conduct case | Main | "Could firing squad make a comeback in Utah, elsewhere?" »

October 14, 2014

Does the Constitution limit the age at which a juve killer can be tried as an adult?

The question in the title of this post is promopted by this AP story emerging from Pittsburgh sent my way by a helpful reader.  The story is headlined "Boy, 10, Charged As Adult In Death Of 90-Year-Old Woman," and here are the details:

A 10-year-old boy has been charged as an adult in the beating death of a 90-year-old woman over the weekend in northeastern Pennsylvania. Prosecutors in Wayne County said the boy was visiting his grandfather, the caretaker of Helen Novak, in Tyler Hill on Saturday, when county emergency responders got a call reporting her death.

District Attorney Janine Edwards said in a statement that the boy’s mother brought him in to the state police barracks at Honesdale the same afternoon and reported that her son had told her that he had gone into the woman’s room and she yelled at him. The boy told his mother that “he got mad, lost his temper and grabbed a cane and put it around Novak’s throat,” police said. Advised of his rights and interviewed by a trooper, he said he “pulled Novak down on the bed and held the cane on her throat and then punched her numerous times,” authorities said.

State police said the boy told them that he went to his grandfather and told him that the woman was “bleeding from her mouth” but denied he had harmed her, but later told him that he had punched the woman and put a cane around her neck. Police said an autopsy done Monday at Wayne Memorial Hospital in Honesdale indicated blunt force trauma to the victim’s neck, and the death was ruled a homicide....

The boy was charged as an adult with criminal homicide and aggravated assault, with the prosecutor’s office noting that the crime of homicide “is specifically excluded from the juvenile act” and therefore “a juvenile who commits the crime of homicide is charged as an adult.”  The boy was held without bail pending an Oct. 22 preliminary hearing.

I am pretty sure that, prior to the Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment ruling in Miller, this 10-year-old killer would have be facing a mandatory LWOP sentence under Pennsylvania law. Now, I believe, state law provides only a mandatory minimum of 20 or 25 years for this kind of killer. Especially for those still troubled by the Miller ruling and eager to have some juve killers get LWOP sentences (such as folks talking here over at Crime & Consequences), I wonder if they would assert that even a kid still in elementary school could and should never even have a chance to live outside a cage for a crime like this.

October 14, 2014 at 11:01 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e201b8d07d32df970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Does the Constitution limit the age at which a juve killer can be tried as an adult? :

Comments

Before we even reach a discussion about the length of a possible criminal sentence for a 10 year old charged with murder, we must first decide whether he is too young to be charged with any crime at all, even one this serious. I believe that it would be virtually unprecedented under modern American jurisprudence to prosecute a 10 year old for homicide. This case cries out for some kind of diversion and psychiatric intervention and treatment rather than punishment and retribution. I will be watching this case closely.

Posted by: Jim Gormley | Oct 14, 2014 11:09:16 AM

I favor the old common law distinction of presumptions for juvenile culpability, which would hold a ten year old is not responsible. But more broadly, when we're taking about punishment for juvenile murderers, the idea of "death is different" applies, but in a different way. In civilized society, murder should be treated differently than other crimes and such a society can be judged, I think, by how seriously and differently it punishes the crime of murder.

What to do with this kid? I have no idea other than the vast weight of empirical literature - for all of your "forward" thinking fans - strongly suggests that he's at high risk for future violence.

Posted by: Steve Erickson | Oct 14, 2014 11:44:52 AM

Avoid sending him to an adult prison.

How would he be hurt if reared to adulthood in a structured environment?

Posted by: Docile Jim Brady @Columbus, OH | Oct 15, 2014 12:21:51 AM

Anybody preaching for his release gets him as foster parents in their home. I happen to have a small collection of child murderers. And I invite some of you pro-criminal lawyers to have a brief chat with one or two.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 15, 2014 1:06:59 AM

Prof.Berman. Clicked over to C&C. Glad you have gone over there to continue your informative debate with Bill.

Small point. I do not intentionally insult those that disagree with me. For example, I debated the person supporting the lead level theory, and tried to rebut him with international counter example. I then found on my own a longitudinal study of real people that supported his point and immediately agreed with him, lead is a factor. In the crime rate.

If you are referring to the affectionate word, dumbass, that is a term of art, not an epithet. It refers to modern, very intelligent students, who undergo the indoctrination of 1L. I have evidence for that classification. They emerge believing minds can be read, the future forecast, and that standards of conduct should be based on a fictitious character. Why fictitious? To make the standards objective, of course. Furthermore, no lawyer in this country knows the real definition of reason, reasonable, despite their having learned about Medieval philosophy in 10th Grade World History and again in Western Civ 101, freshman year. The indoctrination erased their memories. This atavism is appalling in people who make 99% of the government policy of our nation.

I can try to find an euphemism if you prefer.

I am not blocked, but am not welcome until I change my tone at C&C. I will change my tone when the profession improves a little or even shows a sign of wanting to.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 15, 2014 5:29:33 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB