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
Worst Attorney I have ever encountered he will WASTE your time and steal your MONEY. Don't RECOMMEND!
Patric W
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
Current Pre law students and I had a question pertaining to a certain scenario in class. He responded back and gave me a case that broke down exactly what I asked for.
Chad T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is an outstanding lawyer. As a fellow attorney, I've relied on his expertise in several cases, and have referred clients to him with excellent results.
Wyman
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Sisto did an absolutely fantastic job on my case. He achieved the best possible result for me, and really made me feel comfortable and that he had my best interest at heart. He kept in constant communication with me, was very prompt in his response to my calls and emails, and he went above and beyond in answering any and all questions that I had. His professionalism and the lengths to which he went to secure a good result for me really helped make a stressful situation feel better. If you ever find yourself in need of legal representation, I highly recommend Fred Sisto. You will not regret it.
Michael G
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is extremely knowledgeable and so helpful. I would recommend him to anyone. He really goes above and beyond. He cares about his work and his clients.
Kevin M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is the best and his DUI alerts are not to be missed!
Rich D
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very good
Nazario B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is a very knowledgeable and effective attorney. His knowledge of the law enables him to understand your issue, plan a strategy to address it and explain the strategy to you. He also possesses excellent communication skills that assist him interactions with other attorneys and judges.
Michael G
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Many thanks to Fred for the posts of where the DWI checkpoints will be held and for the advise to take an Uber when planning a night out!!
Michael K