Christopher Simmons Case Study

His bond was set at 25,000 cash and he has no family to help him get out. Mr. Smith was appointed a Public Defender, Stanley Ridgecutt, a seasoned veteran of the Public Defender’s office. Mr.Ridgecutt dug into the clients past pulling his records. It turns out Mr. Smith has a history of mild mental illness which was exposed by the trial of admissions, which resulted to 72 hours of suicide watch at the mental ward. This could be useful later in court to help get charges amended or dismissed altogether in lieu of jail or prison

The last victim was Curtis C. Burke he was a 36 white male with no relation to Charles, finally the location of the incident was Kansas City , Missouri. Also, for this crime there was 4 witness three of them was police chief and the last one was just a police officer. The first witness was John H. Fultz and he was a white male and didn’t mention the age, the city of the residence was in Wellsville, Ohio with no relation to the

While Simmons was starting to serve his time, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that it was unconstitutional to give the death penalty to the mentally challenged in 2003. Due to this new law Simmons case was reviewed once again. They had come to the conclusion that due to a national consensus, many are against the death penalty of juvenile offenders. They then sentenced Simmons to life in prison without the chance of parole. The State of Missouri appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

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

The question specifically posed for the court to address is whether the courts should consider the age of a juvenile suspect when deciding whether he or she is in custody for Miranda purposes. The Supreme Court issued an opinion by Justice Sonia Sotomayor determining that a age should be considered when determining if a juvenile suspect is in custody and should be issued their Miranda rights. Sotomayor’s opinion stated, “It is beyond dispute that children will often feel bound to submit to police questioning when an adult in the same circumstances would feel free to leave. Seeing no reason for police officers or courts to blind themselves to that commonsense reality, we hold that a child’s age properly informs the Miranda custody analysis” (The Oyez Project as IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law). The case was returned to a lower court to determine how the age of J.D.B. may have impacted the statements and evidence obtained by

On December 22, 1987, Ronald Gene Simmons started a killing spree. This was the worst mass murder in Arkansas history and the worst crime involving one family. Simmons rampage ended on December 28, 1987, leaving fourteen dead of his immediate family and two former coworkers. Ronald Simmons was born on July ,15, 1940 in Chicago, Illinois.{www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?search=1&entryID=3731.} . His mother was Loretta Simmons and father was William Simmons.

It is likely that the first family to arrive that of Simmons’s twenty-three-year-old son, William H, Simmons II. He was accompanied by his wife, Renata May Simmons, and their son. The child was only twenty months old. The young couple was shot. Their bodies were covered with coats and bedding in the dining room rather than being thrown in the pit Simmons had used to inter the other murdered family members.

I believe that each crime or murder should be looked at independently. That then mere fact that a person is under eighteen should not exclude them from the potential of a death sentence. Each crime should to be examined for premeditation and the heinousness of the

Christopher Simmons, 17 at the time, was condemned to death in 1993 for murder. He exhausted all of his state and federal appeals up until 2002, meaning they were all rejected. In 2002, the Missouri Supreme Court granted Simmons a stay of execution while the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Atkins v. Virginia, a case that was held on the execution of the mentally disabled. “When the Supreme Court decided Atkins v. Virginia in 2002 (barring executions for the mentally disabled), Simmons filed a new petition. He argued that the Eighth Amendment rationale of Atkins should also bar the execution of juveniles” (Legal Dictionary, n.d.).

Supreme Court reviewed the cases of Evan Miller and Kuntrell Jackson who were both convicted with committing capital murder at the age of fourteen. Firstly, all defendants are allowed to argue that their punishment violated the Eighth Amendment. According to www.verdict.justia.com, “ On a theory that Miller and Jackson were entitled to individualized sentencing, they were denied the opportunity to argue the relevance of these mitigating factors to their proper punishment in an attempt to persuade their judges that the sentence of LWOP was too harsh.” Specifically, this indicates that the accused people were not allowed to argue that their punishment had violated the Eighth Amendment. Secondly, age matters when deciding the consequence for the convicted criminals.

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).

Because of the mass media coverage and the societal biases regarding the case, the jury found the teenagers guilty on account of limited and biased evidence. The defense was unable to effectively challenge the jury due to these preconceived notions and ideas, despite the jury itself being unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants committed the crime described in the

Case: Roper v. Simmons (2005) Rule of the Case: The decision in which the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed under the age of 18. Facts: In Missouri, Christopher Simmons, age 17, made a plan to murder someone and bring along two of his friends, and one friend ended up dropping out. The plan was to break in and enter, tie up the victim, and toss the victim off a bridge. The case was brought to trial with exceeding evidence. Simmons confessed to the murder, videotaped reenactment of the crime, and testimony from Tessmer, the friend who backed out, that premeditation was involved.

Therefore, when a person argues that a juvenile was not aware of their crime is a discrediting claim. In 1990 in the city of Chicago, a couple expecting their first child were murdered in cold blood in the hands of a juvenile teen. The teen shot both the husband and the wife who pleaded for their lives and the life of their unborn child. Author of “Juvenile Justice Information Exchange”, Jennifer Jenkins states, “He reported to a friend, who testified at his trial, about his ‘thrill kill’ that he just wanted to ‘see what it would feel like to shoot someone’”. This killer was aware of his crime and was aware of who his victims were due to planning the murders months before.