Roper Vs Simmons Case Study

Impact: The Supreme Court decided that the minimum age for the death penalty in capital cases is 16 years old. Case: Schall v. Martin (1984) Issue: Martin’s attorney felt as though Martins’ preventive detention violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. Facts: Gregory Martin was a 14 year old kid, who was arrested on December 13th, 1977 in NYC. Martin was charged with first-degree murder, second-degree assault, and criminal possession of a weapon.

Fact: Joseph and Susie Hurtado was a married couple from Sacramento California. The couple became friends with a local immigrant from Chile named Antonio Estuardo. Over the course of their friendship Joseph discovered that his wife and Estuardo was having an affair. Once the defendant found out about the affair he confronted Estuardo at a bar and was arrested for battery. However, while Hurtado was awaiting trial he shot and killed Estuardo; the defendant was charged with murder.

Roper Vs. Simmons Christopher Simmons committed a capital murder in September of 1993. Simmons was only 17 at the time. Simmons had an accomplice, his friend Charles Benjamin who was only 15 years old.

The verdict was that Simmons should be sentenced to death and that it was NOT a violation of his 8th and 14th amendment. “Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and the sentence.” Of course Simmons disagreed with that therefore he went to the supreme court, so that they would agree with him that it is a violation of his amendments. Roper the petitioner believed that Christopher should be sentenced to death because he killed someone, it doesn't matter that he was 17 when he did the crime. If you committed the crime you have to pay the price, shouldn't have done it if you can't do the

Kaylee Woolery Mr. O’Rourke Political Issues Tuesday, April 18th Supreme Court Opinion In 1989 the case of Roper vs. Simmons, the US Supreme Court opposed the death sentence and decided against the death penalty for anyone younger than 18. They argued that his 8th amendment rights were being infringed resulting in cruel and unusual punishment for the execution of a minor. Christopher Simmons, a 17-year-old, was arrested and put on trial for the first-degree murder of Shirley Crook. Due to the fact that it was first-degree murder, he was sentenced to death.

Imagine being the “chosen one” on a kill list made by your friends. One of the many teen cases in juvenile justice was the disgraceful murder of a 16 year old student, Cassie Stoddart, murdered by her two friends, Torey Adamcik and Brian Draper on September 22, 2006. Both Torey and Brian were found guilty of First Degree Murder, charged as adults, and given life in prison with no possibility of parole plus 30 years for committing. I believe their punishment is deemed fair and right. Background on victim Cassie Stoddart was a bright, young, responsible, and popular student; She was always told she had the perfect life, perfect grades, and was always praised by many in her community.

In Miller vs. Alabama, the question of whether or not a life without parole sentence for minors violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments was raised and discussed (1). In July of 2003, Evan Miller, along with an accomplice named Colby Smith, severely beat Cole Cannon with a baseball bat and burned down his trailer while he was inside (1). Miller was only fourteen year olds at the time of the crime (1). In 2004, Miller was transferred from Lawrence County’s juvenile court to Lawrence County’s Circuit Court to be tried as an adult (1). He was going to be tried for capital murder during the course of an arson (1).

In fact, rape should’ve been considered a capital crime in this instance. I believe that the supreme Court was completely wrong in their decision to overturn Coker’s death sentence. Because of this, I would have agreed with the lower court's’ decision, and ruled that Coker should have been sentenced to

Oklahoma was considered in the case because of the similarity to this case involving a fifteen year old. Due to the manner of the crime and by Simmons being the lead perpetrator, the Thompson v. Oklahoma case was irrelevant. The court system has also reviewed the differences between adults and children when it comes to the death penalty. Children lack maturity, vulnerable to pressure from others, and they may be more susceptible to rehabilitation; I agree with the differences to a certain degree. If an adult has always sought attention from the wrong crowd, they could be pressured to do things just to stay in the click.

In Roper v. Simmons there are two issues that must be addressed, the first being the issue of moral maturity and culpability. The defense in the trial phase of this case argued that Mr. Simmons was an at an age where he was not responsible enough to fully understand the effects and consequences of his actions. The majority draws on Atkins v. Virginia to argue that this specific precedent supports their case that the death penalty should not be imposed on the mentally immature or impaired. However, an important point to be made is that the Atkins v. Virginia decision is geared towards the clinical definition of mental retardation: significant limitations that limit adaptive skills. Also, another important question to consider is the competency and premeditation of Mr. Simmons’ crime in this case.

The case made it a law that juveniles had the rights guaranteed to them by the fourteenth

Thus, the article said, “Voting 5 to 4, the Court in Roper cited recent evidence to conclude that the execution of persons who were minors at the time of their crimes now violated "evolving standards of decency" and, hence, the Eighth Amendment.” This quote states that this case has violated the Eighth Amendment and therefore is

What if your loved one was savagely killed by a teenager with no remorse? Juveniles should be convicted as adults for ferocious crimes because even though they are “kids” they kill innocent people and should get punished for the crime they committed. Teenagers commit gruesome crimes like murder and knowing what they are makes the situation far worse. In the article “Kids are Kids-Until They Commit Crimes” the author Jennifer Jenkins talks about the teenagers that committed gory murders against innocent people that didn’t deserve to die like a road animal. For example, a 13 year old shot to death an english teacher.

Crimes are happening around us whether we pay attention to them or not. Those crimes as dangerous as murder are committed by all ages but should younger criminal in their juvenile age received the same punishment as older criminals. On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violates the Eighth Amendment.(On-Demand Writing Assignment Juvenile Justice) Advocates on the concurring side believes that mandatory life in prison is wrong and should be abolish. However, the dissenting side believe that keeping the there should be a life in prison punishment for juvenile who commit heinous crime regardless of their age.

In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that it is immoral to give juveniles life sentences, even if they commit a crime as serious as murder, because it is a cruel and unusual punishment. This has been an issue in America as teenagers are often treated as adults in court due to a belief that their crimes warrant a harsh punishment. Many believe that these kids should not be given such major sentences because they are still immature and do not have the self control that adults do. I agree that juveniles do not deserve life sentences because they put less thought and planning into these crimes and they often are less malicious than adults. The article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” explains that the teenagers lose brain tissue that is responsible for self control and impulses (Thompson 7).