In the 2005 Roper v. Simmons decision, the Supreme Court determined that capital punishment, the death penalty, was not appropriate for offenders under the age of 18. The Court accepted the argument that juveniles are less blameworthy than adult offenders due to differences in their cognitive abilities and the influence of factors outside of their control, such as household dysfunction or the existence of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Recent empirical literature examining both brain development and the impact of ACEs on both brain maturity and offending behaviors demonstrates that brain maturation and psychosocial maturation continue into the mid-twenties. As a result, youthful offenders, those 18 to 24 of age, may possess many of the neuropsychological deficiencies attributed to juveniles and yet be sentenced to death. This research examines if juries of capital punishment trials recognize the impact of age and ACEs when determining their sentencing decision.
AckerJ. R.LanierC. S. (1994). In fairness and mercy: Statutory mitigating factors in capital punishment laws. Criminal Law Bulletin, 30(4), 299–345.
2.
Al’AbsiM.GintyA. T.LovalloW. R. (2021). Neurobiological mechanisms of early life adversity, blunted stress reactivity and risk for addiction. Neuropharmacology, 188, 108519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2021.108519
3.
AndrewsA. B. (1991). Social work expert testimony regarding mitigation in capital sentencing proceedings. Social Work, 36, 440–445.
4.
AndrewsA. B. (2012). American Bar Association supplementary guidelines for the mitigation function of defense teams in death penalty cases: Implications for Social Work. Social Work, 57(2), 155–164.
5.
ArainM.HaqueM.JohalL.MathurP.NelW.RaisA.SandhuR.SharmaS. (2013). Maturation of the adolescent brain. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 9, 449–461.
6.
AtkinsonJ. (2013). Trauma-informed services and trauma-specific care for Indigenous Australian children (Closing the gap Clearinghouse Resource 21). Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
7.
BaglivioM. T.JackowskiK.GreenwaldM. A.HowellJ. C. (2014). Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: A statewide analysis of prevalence and prediction of subsequent recidivism using risk and protective factors. Criminology & Public Policy, 13(1), 83–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12064
8.
BaglivioM. T.WolffK. T.PiqueroA. R.EppsN. (2015). The relationship between adverse childhood experiences (ACE) and juvenile offending trajectories in a juvenile offender sample. Criminal Justice Journal, 43(3), 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2015.04.012
9.
BarnettM. E.BrodskyS. L.DavisC. M. (2004). When mitigation evidence makes a difference: Effects of psychological mitigating evidence on sentencing decisions in capital trials. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 22, 751–770.
10.
BarnettM. E.BrodskyS. L.PriceJ. R. (2007). Differential impact of mitigating evidence in capital case sentencing. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 7(1), 39–45.
11.
BellisM. A.LoweyH.LeckenbyN.HughesK.HarrisonD. (2014). Adverse childhood experiences: Retrospective study to determine their impact on adult health behaviours and health outcomes in a UK population. Journal of Public Health, 36, 81–91.
12.
BenekosP. J.MerloA. V. (2019). A decade of change: Roper v. Simmons, defending childhood, and juvenile justice policy. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 30(1), 102–127.
13.
BenteleU.BowersW. J. (2001). How jurors decide on death: Guilt is overwhelming; aggravation requires death; and mitigation is no excuse. Brooklyn Law Review, 66(4), 1011–1080.
14.
BiglerE. D. (2021). Charting brain development in graphs, diagrams, and figures from childhood, adolescence, to early adulthood: Neuroimaging implications for neuropsychology. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 7, 27–54.
15.
BjerregaardB.SmithM. D.FogelS. J.PalaciosW. R. (2010). Alcohol and drug mitigation in capital murder trials: Implications for sentencing decisions. Justice Quarterly, 27(4), 517–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820903051623
16.
BlumeJ. H.FreedmanH. L.VannL. S.HritzA. (2020). Death by numbers: Why evolving standards compel extending Roper’s categorical ban against executing juveniles from eighteen to twenty-one. Texas Law Review, 98(5), 921–952.
17.
BlumeJ. H.JohnsonS. L.SundbyS. E. (2008). Competent capital representation: The necessity of knowing and heeding what jurors tell us about mitigation. Hofstra Law Review, 36, 1035–1066.
BrameR.PaternosterR.MazerolleP.PiqueroA. (1998). Testing for the equality of maximum likelihood regression coefficients between two independent equations. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14(3), 245–261.
20.
BrewerT. W. (2004). Race and jurors’ receptivity to mitigation in capital cases: The effect of jurors’, defendants’, and victims’ race in combination. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 529–545.
21.
Brief for American Psychological Association. (2012). American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers as Amici Curiae supporting Respondents Evan Miller and Kuntrell Jackson, Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (No. 10-9649, 10-9647).
22.
Brief for the Juvenile Law Center. (2010). National Juvenile Defender Center, Children and Family Justice Center, et al. as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner Terrance Jamar Graham, Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (No. 08-7412, 08-7621).
23.
BrindleR. C.PearsonA.GintyA. T. (2022). Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) relate to blunted cardiovascular and cortisol reactivity to acute laboratory stress: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 134, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104530
24.
BrownL. L.McGeeS. G. (2018). Social work and capital punishment: A call to action. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 3, 229–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-018-0062-7
25.
CaseyB. J. (2015). Beyond simple models of self-control to circuit-based accounts of adolescent behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 295–319.
26.
CaseyB. J.BonnieR. J.DavisA.FaigmanD. L.HoffmanM. B.JonesO. D.MontagueR.MorseS. J.RaichleM. E.RichesonJ. A.ScottE. S.SteinbergL.Taylor-ThompsonK.WagnerA. (2017). How should justice policy treat young offenders? Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law (p. 1744).
27.
CaseyB. J.GetzS.GalvanA. (2008). The adolescent brain. Developmental Review, 28(1), 62–77.
28.
CaseyB. J.SimmonsC.SomervilleL. H.Baskin-SommersA. (2022). Making the sentencing case: Psychological and neuroscientific evidence for expanding the age of youthful offenders. Annual Review of Criminology, 5(1), 321–343.
29.
CauffmanE.SteinbergL. (2000). (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18, 741–760.
30.
CheinJ.AlbertD.O’BrienL.UckertK.SteinbergL. (2011). Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain’s reward circuitry. Developmental Science, 14(2), F1–10.
31.
CohenA. O.BonnieR. J.Taylor-ThompsonK.CaseyB. J. (2016). When does a juvenile become an adult? Implications for law and policy. Temple Law Review, 88, 769–788.
32.
CraigJ. M.PiqueroA. R.FarringtonD. P.TtofiM. M. (2017). A little early risk goes a long bad way: Adverse childhood experiences and life-course offending in the Cambridge study. Criminal Justice Journal, 53, 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.09.005
33.
DukeN. N.PettingellS. L.McMorrisB. J.BorowskyI. W. (2010). Adolescent violence perpetration: Associations with multiple types of adverse childhood experiences. Pediatrics, 125, 778–786.
34.
Eddings v. Oklahoma. (1982). 455 U.S. 104.
35.
EdensJ. F.Buffington-VollumJ. K.KeilenA.RoskampP.AnthonyC. (2005). Predictions of future dangerousness in capital murder trials: Is it time to “disinvent the wheel?Law and Human Behavior, 29(1), 55–86.
36.
FeldB. C. (2008). A slower form of death: Implications of Roper v. Simmons for juveniles sentenced to life without parole. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy, 22, 9–65.
37.
FeldB. C. (2013). Adolescent criminal responsibility, proportionality, and sentencing policy: Roper, Graham, Miller/Jackson, and the youth discount. Law and Inequity, 31, 263–330.
38.
FelittiV. J.AndaR. F.NordenbergD.WilliamsonD. F.SpitzA. M.EdwardsV.KossM. P.MarksJ. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults, The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 14, 245–258.
39.
FoxB. H.PerezN.CassE.BaglivioM. T.EppsN. (2015). Trauma changes everything: Examining the relationship between adverse childhood experiences and serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 46, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.01.011
40.
GarveyS. P. (1998). Aggravation and mitigation in capital cases: What do jurors think?Columbia Law Review, 98(6), 1538–1576.
41.
GasperettiM. A. (2022). Crime and punishment: An empirical study of the effects of racial bias on capital sentencing decisions.University of Miami Law Review, 76(2), 525–611.
42.
GillespieL. K.SmithM. D.BjerregaardB.FogelS. J. (2014). Examining the impact of proximate culpability mitigation in capital punishment sentencing recommendations: The influence of mental health mitigators. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 698–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-014-9255-5
GrafG. H.ChihuriS.BlowM.LiG. (2021). Adverse childhood experiences and justice system contact: A systematic review. Pediatrics, 147(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-021030
45.
Graham v. Florida. (2010). 560 U.S. 48.
46.
Gregg v. Georgia. (1976). 428 U. S. 153.
47.
GrissoT. (2002). Using what we know about child maltreatment and delinquency. Children’s Services, 5, 299–305.
48.
GrissoT.KavanaughA. (2016). Prospects for developmental evidence in juvenile sentencing based onMiller v. Alabama. Psychology Public Policy and Law, 22(3), 235–249.
49.
GurR. C. (2021). Development of brain behavior integration systems related to criminal culpability from childhood to young adulthood: Does it stop at 18 years?Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 7, 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40817-021-00101-1
50.
HaneyC. (1995). Social context of capital murder: Social histories and the logic of mitigation. Santa Clara Law Review, 35(2), 547–610.
51.
HerzogJ. I.SchmahlC. (2018). Adverse childhood experiences and the consequences on neurobiological, psychosocial, and somatic conditions across the lifespan. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 1–8.
52.
IrwinC. E.Jr. (1993). Adolescence and risk taking: How are they related. In BellN. J.JrBellR. W. (Eds.), Adolescent risk taking (pp. 7–28). SAGE Publications, Inc.
53.
JohnsonS. B.BlumR. W.GieddJ. N. (2009). Adolescent maturity and the brain: The promise and pitfalls of neuroscience research in adolescent health policy. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45(3), 216–221.
54.
Jones v. Mississippi. (2021). 141 S.Ct. 1307.
55.
KolbB.GibbR. (2011). Brain plasticity and behaviour in the developing brain. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 20(4), 265–276.
56.
LoganD. D. (1989). Is it mitigation or aggravation? Troublesome areas of defense evidence in capital sentencing. Forum, 16(5), 14–20.
57.
MalvasoC. G.CaleJ.WhittenT.DayA.SinghS.HackettL.DelfabbroP. H.RossS. (2022). Associations between adverse childhood experiences and trauma among young people who offend: A systematic literature review. Trauma Violence & Abuse, 23, 1677–1694. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380211013132
58.
MatusiakM. C.VaughnM. S.CarmenR. V. D. (2014). The progression of “evolving standards of decency” in U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Criminal Justice Review, 39(3), 253–271.
59.
McEwenC. A.GregersonS. F. (2019). A critical assessment of the adverse childhood experiences study at 20 years. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 56(6), 790–794.
60.
McKoy v North Carolina. (1990). 494 U.S. 433.
61.
McLaughlinK. A.SheridanM. A.LambertH. K. (2014). Childhood adversity and neural development: Deprivation and threat as distinct dimensions of early experience. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 47, 578–591.
62.
McPhersonS. B. (1995). Psychosocial investigation in death penalty mitigation: Procedures, pitfalls, and impact. In DaviesG.Lloyd-BostockS.McMurranM.WilsonC. (Eds.), Psychology, law and criminal justice: international developments in research and practice (pp. 286–295). Walter De Gruyter.
MerskyJ. P.TopitzesJ.ReynoldsA. J. (2012). Unsafe at any age: Linking childhood and adolescent maltreatment to delinquency and crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 49(2), 295–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427811415284
65.
MileyL. N.Heiss-MosesE.CochranJ. K.HeideK. M.FogelS. J.SmithM. D.BejerregaardB. J. (2020). An examination of the effects of mental disorders as mitigating factors on capital sentencing outcomes. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 38(4), 381–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2477
OralR.RamirezM.CooheyC.NakadaS.WalzA.KuntzA.BenoitJ.Peek-AsaC. (2016). Adverse childhood experiences and trauma informed care: The future of health care. Pediatric Research, 79(1-2), 227–233.
70.
PerlinM. L.LynchA. J. (2021). Some mother’s child has gone astray”: Neuroscientific approaches to a therapeutic jurisprudence model of juvenile sentencing. Family Court Review, 59(3), 478–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12589
71.
PerryB. D. (2009). Examining child maltreatment through a neurodevelopmental lens: Clinical applications of the neurosequential model of therapeutics. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 14, 240–255.
72.
PerryB. D.GriffinG.DavisG.PerryJ. A.PerryR. D. (2018). The impact of neglect, trauma, and maltreatment on neurodevelopment: Implications for juvenile justice practice, programs, and policy. In BeechA. R.CarterA. J.MannR. E.RotshteinP. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of forensic neuroscience (pp. 815–835). Wiley Blackwell.
73.
PortsK. A.FordD. C.MerrickM. T.GuinnA. S. (2020). ACEs: Definitions, measurement, and prevalence. In AsmundsonG. J. G.AfifiT. O. (Eds.), Adverse childhood experiences (pp. 17–34). Academic Press.
74.
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
75.
RichardsT. N.SmithM. D.JenningsW. G.BjerregaardB.FogelS. J. (2014). An examination of defendant sex disparity in capital sentencing: A propensity score matching approach. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 681–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-014-9253-7
76.
Roper v. Simmons. (2005). 543 U.S. 551.
77.
RudolphM. D.Miranda-DomínguezO.CohenA. O.BreinerK.SteinbergL.BonnieR. J.ScottE. S.Taylor-ThompsonK.CheinJ.FettichK. C.RichesonJ. A.DellarcoD. V.GalvánA.CaseyB. J.FairD. A. (2017). At risk of being risky: The relationship between “brain age” under emotional states and risk preference. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 93–106.
SawyerS. M.AzzopardiP. S.WickremarathneD.PattonG. C. (2018). The age of adolescence. Lancet Child and Adolescent Health, 2, 223–228.
80.
SchiraldiV.WesternB.BradnerK. (2015). Community-based responses to justice-involved young adults. New thinking in community corrections bulletin. U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
81.
SchroederJ.GuinC. C.PogueR.BordelonD. (2006). Mitigating circumstances in death penalty decisions: Using evidence-based research to inform social work practice in capital trials. Social Work, 51(4), 355–364.
82.
ScottE. S.BonnieR. J.SteinbergL. (2016). Young adulthood as a transitional legal category: Science, social change, and justice policy. Fordham Law Review, 85(2), 641–666.
83.
ScottE. S.SteinbergL. (2008). Adolescent development and the regulation of youth crime. The Future of Children, 18(2), 15–33.
84.
SegerenM.FassaertT.de WitM.GrimbergenC.PopmaA. (2020). The relationship between adverse childhood experiences and self-sufficiency problems in early adulthood among violent offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 101, 104354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104354
85.
ShapiroM. (2008). An overdose of dangerousness: How ‘Future Dangerousness’ captures the least culpable capital defendants and undermines the rationale for the executions it supports. American Journal of Criminal Law, 35(2), 145–200.
86.
SondheimerJ. N. (1990). A continuing source of aggravation: The improper consideration of mitigating factors in death penalty sentencing. The Hastings Law Journal, 41(2), 409–446.
87.
SowellE. R.ThompsonP. M.HolmesC. J.JerniganT. L.TogaA. W. (1999). In vivo evidence for post-adolescent brain maturation in frontal and striatal regions. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 859–861.
88.
Stanford v. Kentucky. (1989). 492 U.S. 361.
89.
SteinbergL.ScottE. S. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. American Psychologist, 58(12), 1009–1018.
90.
StetlerR. (2007). The mystery of mitigation: What jurors need to make a reasoned moral response in capital sentencing. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change, 11, 237–260.
91.
StetlerR. (2018). The past, present, and future of the mitigation profession: Fulfilling the constitutional requirement of individualized sentencing in capital cases. Hofstra Law Review, 46(4), 1161–1256.
92.
StewartT. (2021). Capital punishment of young adults in light of evolving standards of science and decency: Why Ohio should raise the minimum age for death penalty eligibility to twenty-five (25). Cleveland State Law Review, 70(1), 91–119.
93.
TaillieuT. L.DavilaI. G.StruckS. (2020). ACEs and violence in adulthood. In AsmundsonG. J. G.AfifiT. O. (Eds.), Adverse childhood experiences (pp. 119–142). Academic Press.
94.
TeagueR.MazerolleP.LegoszM.SandersonJ. (2008). Linking childhood exposure to physical abuse and adult offending: Examining mediating factors and gendered relationships. Justice Quarterly, 25, 313–348.
95.
TeicherM. H.SamsonJ. A.AndersonC. M.OhashiK. (2016). The effects of childhood maltreatment on brain structure, function, and connectivity. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17, 652–666.
96.
TettertonV. S.BrodskyS. L. (2007). More is sometimes better: Increased mitigating evidence and sentencing leniency. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 7(3), 79–85.
97.
Thompson v. Oklahoma. (1988). 487 U.S. 815.
98.
TurlingtonS. (2008). Completely unguided discretion: Admitting non-statutory aggravating and non-statutory mitigating evidence in capital sentencing trials. Pierce Law Review, 6(3), 469–484.
99.
Van DuinL.De Vries RobbéM.MarheR.BevaartF.ZijlmansJ.LuijksM.-J. A.DoreleijersT. A. H.PopmaA. (2021). Criminal history and adverse childhood experiences in relation to recidivism and social functioning in multi-problem young adults. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(5), 637–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820975455
100.
VaughanT. J.Bell HolleranL. (2023). Adverse childhood experiences in capital sentencing: A focal concerns approach to understanding capital juror leniency. Justice Quarterly, 40(2), 187–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2022.2038242
101.
WaylandK. (2008). The importance of recognizing trauma through capital mitigation investigations and presentations. Hofstra Law Review, 36(3), 923–962.
102.
WederN.KaufmanJ. (2011). Critical periods revisited: Implications for intervention with traumatized children. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 50(11), 1087–1089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2011.07.021
103.
WilliamsA. (2020). Early childhood trauma impact on adolescent brain development, decision making abilities, and delinquent behaviors: Policy implications for juveniles tried in adult court systems. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 71(1), 5–17.
104.
WolffK. T.BaglivioM. T.PiqueroA. R. (2017). The relationship between adverse childhood experiences and recidivism in a sample of juvenile offenders in community-based treatment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61, 1210–1242.
