Page Hero
Juvenile Justice
NACDL fully supports the concept that juveniles are different than adults and should be treated as such. NACDL encourages legislators to promote polices that evaluate juvenile family history and brain development prior to developing legislation that could in effect have profound implications on a juvenile's future.
The decision to send a youth to the adult system is a very serious one. Juveniles are different from adults and should be treated as such. The juvenile system is more focused on rehabilitation and provides more support and opportunities for juvenile offenders compared to adult criminal facilities. Substantial research has concluded youth dealt with in the juvenile system are far less likely to commit new crimes than those tried as adults.
Webinars State Reform Additional Resources on Juvenile Justice
Landmark Cases
Roper v. Simmons (2005) - The United States Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that it is unconstitutional to impose the death penalty for a crime committed by a child under the age of 18, stating that it is "cruel and unusual punishment" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
Graham v. Florida (2010) and Sullivan v. Florida (2010) - The United States Supreme Court ruled that life without the possibility of parole sentences for juveniles convicted of nonhomicide offenses are unconstitutional.
J.D.B v. North Carolina (2010) - Under consideration in this case was whether a child's age is a relevant factor to consider in determining whether the child is in custody for purposes of Miranda v. Arizona. The United States Supreme Court ruled that a child's age must be considered by law enforcement in determining whether Miranda warnings need to be given to children during police interrogations. NACDL Amicus Brief
Miller v. Alabama (2012) - Under consideration in this case was the constitutionality of imposing life without parole sentences on juveniles convicted of homicide offenses. The United States Supreme Court ruled that "mandatory life without parole for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on 'cruel and unusual punishments' and that a 'judge or jury must have the opportunity to consider mitigating circumstances before imposing the harshest possible penalty for juveniles.'"
Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016) - Under consideration in this case was whether Miller v. Alabama applied retroactively to individuals serving mandatory juvenile life without parole sentences. In a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that their decision in Miller v. Alabama applied retroactively.
Jones v. Mississippi (2021) - Under consideration in this case was the constitutionality of imposing a life without parole sentence on a juvenile that has not been found to be permanently incorrigible. In a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a sentencing authority is not required to find a juvenile permanently incorrigible before imposing a life without parole sentence. NACDL Amicus Brief
Trial Defense Guidelines
NACDL was pleased to assist in the development and sought subsequent Board approval of Trial Defense Guideline: Representing a Child Client Facing a Possible Life Sentence. This valuable resource provides defense attorneys with a standard in defending juveniles who are facing the possibility of a life sentence.
Webinars
In November 2020, NACDL partnered with Human Rights for Kids and Legal Aid Justice Center to host Major Changes in the Sentences of Minors: Recent Legal Updates in the Sentencing of Youth in Virginia, a free webinar to teach stakeholders about new developments in the treatment of juveniles facing adult court prosecution. Legislation passed in 2020 established that judges are no longer bound by mandatory minimum sentences and are directed to consider trauma, developmental factors, and other experiences that distinguish the experiences of youth in our criminal legal system.
Webinar Recording and Related Materials
In 2012, NACDL hosted several webinars providing essential instruction to defense lawyers representing juveniles. The first webinar series provides instruction on representing juveniles at sentencing in adult court in the post-Roper, Graham and Miller era. Topics include Lessons Learned from Graham v. Florida and Re-sentencing Juveniles Convicted of Homicide Post-Miller.
Representing Juveniles in Adult Court Webinar Series
The second webinar series provides strategies for representing juveniles in adult court. Topics include Communicating with a Juvenile Client: JTIP Lesson on Interviewing and Counseling Youth; Incorporating Adolescent Brain & Behavioral Development Science into All Stages of the Criminal Proceeding; and Strategies for Keeping Youth out of Adult Jails and Prisons: Bail, Sentencing and Post-Sentencing Advocacy.
Age Matters: Strategies for Representing Juveniles in Adult Court Webinar Series
Both series were conducted in partnership with the National Juvenile Defender Center, the Juvenile Law Center, and the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth, supported by funding from the Foundation for Criminal Justice and the Ford Foundation.
State Juvenile Justice Reform
States across the country made significant legislative advancements to reform state juvenile justice systems in 2022. For example, California lawmakers passed AB 2361, which requires that a court find by clear and convincing evidence that a youth is not amenable to rehabilitation in the juvenile system before they can be transferred to adult court. The Louisiana legislature enacted HB 746, which restricts the use of solitary confinement for youth. Maryland lawmakers enacted SB 691, which restricts the circumstances under which a child under 13 is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and establishes limits on terms of probation, detention, and out-of-home placements imposed by a juvenile court.
Consider joining NACDL’s State Criminal Justice Network (SCJN) to exchange information, share resources, and develop strategies for promoting rational and humane policies impacting children in the criminal legal system.
State Criminal Justice Network
Rhanelle Collins-Meredith currently serves as a Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney for the Chesterfield County. Previously, she was a prosecutor with the City of Richmond and City of Hopewell Commonwealth’s Attorney’sssss Offices. Prior to working as a prosecutor, she worked for Temple Law Offices in Washington, DC. Since 2010, her practice has been primarily devoted to criminal matters originating in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations court including cases involving violent juvenile offenses, child physical and sexual abuse, adult sexual assault and domestic violence.
James Dold: Inspired by his own personal experiences of child sexual abuse and child labor trafficking, as well as his work fighting to end child trafficking and the use of cruel punishments imposed on children who were convicted of serious crimes, James Dold founded Human Rights for Kids in May of 2017 in response to the human rights abuses that children in the U.S. and around the world face on a daily basis.
Judge Jerrauld Jones is currently the Chief Judge of the Norfolk Circuit Court. He joined the Circuit Court in 2008, having previously served for three years as a Judge of the Norfolk Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. Prior to his judicial appointments, Jerrauld Jones served as the Direction of the Virginia Dept. of Juvenile Justice and served 15 years in the Virginia House of Delegates.
Brad Lindsay is the Deputy Public Defender for the Lynchburg City Office of the Public Defender. Brad received his undergraduate degree from George Mason University, and received his Juris Doctor from Howard University School of Law. Brad first began working as a public defender with the Fairfax County office in 2012. In 2018, Brad transitioned to the Bedford County Office of the Public Defender where he was the Senior Trial Attorney with a specialization in training. Brad joined the Lynchburg office in January 2020.
Julie E. McConnell is a law professor and the Director of the Children’s Defense Clinic at the University of Richmond School of Law. She has worked in juvenile justice for more than 25 years and is a frequent speaker and trainer on these issues. Through her clinic, she and her students represent on a pro bono basis, indigent youth, at trial, in school-based proceedings, and in post-conviction serious offender hearings. McConnell also served as co-counsel on the Azeem Majeed Miller re-sentencing case. The Court reduced Majeed’s two life sentences to 25 years. She also collaborated on the Philip Friend Miller resentencing in U.S. District Court, resulting in a 12-year reduction in his sentence. She has served as a juvenile justice system expert in a Virginia capital murder case and is currently a juvenile justice consultant for the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law in Valetta, Malta. She and her students also advocate for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status predicate orders for unaccompanied minors from Central America to assist in their path to citizenship and she recently started a project to represent individuals originally sentenced as juveniles before the parole board. Additionally, she serves as co-chair of the Virginia Advisory Committee on Juvenile Delinquency and Prevention and was recently appointed the Chair of the Virginia Bar Association’s Commission on the Needs of Children.
Del. Vivian Watts, Delegate 39th House District, Virginia House of Delegates. Vice Chair, Courts of Justice Committee; Chair, Finance Committee. Education: University of Michigan, MI (B.A., cum laude, 1962).