Co-Sponsored by Georgetown University Law Center’s American Criminal Law Review

The landscape of sentencing policy has shifted in recent years, with federal and state lawmakers advocating fewer draconian penalties and beginning to scale back certain sentences. It is clear that the United States stands at a critical juncture for sentencing reform. This symposium is designed to equip practitioners and policy advocates with the latest strategies and research to seize the moment and foster more rational and humane policies.

Panel from the 2020 Presidential Summit and Sentencing Symposium, co-hosted with the Georgetown University Law Center American Criminal Law Review

On November 6, 2019, funded by a grant from Vital Strategies, NACDL hosted Defending Drug Overdose Homicides in Pennsylvania. This day-long program featured local and national speakers sharing insights and understandings regarding the complexities of drug overdose homicide prosecutions.

NACDL lists experts referred by its members, and an expert was in your search.

Non-Capital Mitigation with Lindsay Bendell

A sentencing mitigation video should be short (approximately 10 minutes) and should show the judge that the client is more than what the sentencing report says. Are there potential drawbacks? Yes. But the rewards are greater.

Over time, advocates in the capital defense arena have figured out which strategies work and which do not work. Defense lawyers in noncapital cases can learn from the strategies developed during several decades of capital representation. They can incorporate these strategies into sentencing advocacy for clients charged with drug offenses, noncapital murder, or any other crime. In noncapital cases, the offender is more likely someday to be released and returned to society. This requires more focus on development and resources for the offender that will facilitate a smooth re-entry.

Willie Herring’s case cried out for mitigation. The cry went unanswered. The 5-4 decision from the Ohio Supreme Court in Herring’s case does not break new ground. It does, however, provide important reminders about the duty of capital defense attorneys to ensure that a comprehensive mitigation investigation is conducted in every case.

Brief of American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, Inc., National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the Rutherford Institute as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent.

Comments to the U.S. Sentencing Commission regarding proposed amendments to the sentencing guidelines.

Brief of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellant and Reversal.

This month Chloe Reyes and Patrick Keenan-Devlin review Criminal Defense-Based Forensic Social Work by Ashley Ratliff and Maren Willins (Editors).

NACDL lists experts referred by its members, and an expert was in your search.

In June 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Miller v. Alabama that the practice of sentencing children to mandatory life without parole violates the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments. In doing so, it also provided attorneys representing people facing life without parole for crimes that occurred when they were under 18 with new opportunities and obligations to present a universe of mitigating evidence that would counsel in favor of imposing some other lesser sentence. 

The social and behavioral sciences — and now the U.S. Supreme Court — have recognized that “kids are different.” Traditional scientific research demonstrates that adolescence is a transitional period of life in which cognitive abilities, emotions, judgment, impulse control, and identity are all still developing. Teenagers by their very nature are less mature and less able to assess risk, make good decisions, and control anger.¹