Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

Graham v. Florida

Supreme Court of the United States · 2010 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureConstitutional LawEighth AmendmentLWOPjuvenilenon-homicideproportionalityCruel and Unusual Punishments Clause

Facts

When Graham was 16, he pleaded guilty in adult court to armed burglary with assault or battery and attempted armed robbery arising from an attempted restaurant robbery in which no money was taken but the manager was struck and injured. The trial court withheld adjudication and imposed concurrent probationary terms. Less than six months after release, Graham was arrested again, and the trial court found he had violated probation by, among other things, committing a home invasion robbery, possessing a firearm, and fleeing from police. The court then adjudicated him guilty on the earlier charges and imposed the maximum sentence, including life imprisonment for the armed burglary; because Florida had abolished parole, that sentence gave him no possibility of release except executive clemency.

Issue

Does the Eighth Amendment permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for a nonhomicide crime? More specifically, may a state make at the outset the judgment that a juvenile who did not commit homicide will never be fit to reenter society?

Rule

The Eighth Amendment forbids a state from imposing a sentence of life without parole on a juvenile offender who did not commit homicide. A state need not guarantee eventual freedom, but if it imposes a life sentence on such an offender, it must provide some meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Cleveland, 17-year-old Devin Cole was convicted in adult court of armed robbery and kidnapping arising from a carjacking in which the victim was beaten but survived. Ohio law allowed a sentence of life without parole, and the judge imposed it after concluding Devin was too dangerous ever to return to society.

Under the majority rule, is Devin's sentence constitutional?

Explanation. The majority adopted a categorical Eighth Amendment rule: an offender who was under 18 when he committed a nonhomicide crime may not be sentenced to life without parole. The rule does not depend on a case-specific gross disproportionality showing, the violence of the offense short of homicide, or the fact that the juvenile was prosecuted in adult court. A state cannot make the judgment at the outset that such a juvenile will never be fit to reenter society.