Juvenile Life Sentences: Part 4

by | Apr 28, 2017 | Blog, Criminal Law, Juvenile Delinquency, Laws Protecting Children, New Jersey

Juvenile Life SentencesThe next issue to arise out of cases like this will likely be “what constitutes a lengthy period of parole ineligibility.” It is surprising that the Chief Justice did not anticipate this issue and set a bright line with a definite number of years.

The Court continued:

Because of the overriding importance of that decision, the Court directs trial judges to exercise a heightened level of care before imposing multiple consecutive sentences on juveniles. Judges must do an individualized assessment of the juvenile about to be sentenced but should not resort to general life-expectancy tables when they determine the overall length of a sentence.

It is likely that judges will still be considering life expectancy tables, but will avoid expressly stating this consideration in their sentencing opinions in order to avoid being reversed on appeal. That makes the consideration similar to the related unspoken consideration of retribution, i.e. revenge.

The New Jersey Supreme Court continued:

We limits our decision to the question raised by these appeals, namely, what should happen when a juvenile facing a very lengthy term of imprisonment is first sentenced. The Court noted, however, that even when judges begin to use the Miller factors at sentencing, a small number of juveniles will receive lengthy sentences with substantial periods of parole ineligibility. Graham left it to the States to explore the means and mechanisms to give defendants some meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation. The Court observes that some States have already acted and encourages the New Jersey Legislature to examine this issue to avoid a potential constitutional challenge in the future.

On remand in both cases, the sentencing courts should consider the factors set forth in Miller. The judges should also consider any rehabilitative efforts since defendants’ original sentences.

Zuber’s case was reversed, Comer’s case was affirmed, and both cases are remanded for resentencing consistent with the principles outlined in this opinion.

Excellent rating
Based on 288 reviews
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I am thankful and fortunate to have had Fred represent me as counsel. His expertise, responsiveness and professionalism are second to none. I was more than satisfied with the outcome of my case and the level of service Fred's practice provided.
John M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Quick response to phone calls and emails. Answered all my questions knowledgeably. And represented us very well in the courtroom. Thank you again.
Julie F
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Knowledgeable and reasonable attorney who gets things done. You will not be disappointed.
1093Nj
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred completely exceeded all expectations with the result of my case.
John M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
My son was represented better than I could have ever imagined. His needs were put first and was treated as a friend rather than a number. His/ our opinions were valued and our doubts were always reassured. We couldn’t have asked for a better attorney out there!!! Thanks so much!
Danielle T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Iv had good lawyers defend me before but Mr.Sisto is beyond the best iv had. He explains everything every step of the way until your court date and excels on getting results , I defenatly recomend his services.
Imer J
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
That’s my lawyer he’s the greatest
Donald J
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I like getting the DUI checkpoint alerts from Fred’s office. I’m not much of a drinker but I like to avoid the hassles of checkpoints. Thanks Fred
Denise M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
mr. fred sisto esq. was very professional, answered all questions i had, & made my husband & i feel more at ease about our criminal case.
Meridith T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Excellent advice. Clam and accretive. Handled my case professionally and efficiently. Thank you for the great service. -D.
Danni K