Logo image
Back
Juvenile Resentencing
Book chapter

Juvenile Resentencing

Kirk Heilbrun, David DeMatteo, Christopher King and Sarah Filone
Evaluating Juvenile Transfer and Disposition
2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315661445-10

Abstract

Juvenile Offenders Resentencing Hearing Alternative Sentencing Forensic Mental Health Treatment Amenability Mandatory Life Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care Psychological Behavioral Interventions Resentencing Evaluations Forensic Mental Health Evaluators Forensic Mental Health Professionals Forensic Mental Health Assessments Emerging Practice Literature Psychopathic Features Lwop Sentence Recidivism Risk Unusual Punishment Miller Decision Juvenile Justice Contexts Psychopathy Measures Montgomery Cases Parole Sentences Case Management Inventory Irreparably Corrupt Rehabilitation Potential
In several seminal cases, the United States Supreme Court has recognized that the differences between juveniles and adults in terms of developmental maturity, particularly the inclination toward sensation-seeking and risk-taking, and different approaches to decision-making, require the criminal justice system to treat juvenile offenders differently than adults in the imposition of a sentence following a determination of guilt in criminal court. Given the Supreme Court's decisions in Miller and Montgomery, forensic mental health professionals may be asked to evaluate the appropriateness of imposing a sentence of life without parole on an offender who committed a homicide as a juvenile. Scholars have suggested several different approaches to the assessment of treatment amenability among juveniles, including Kinscherff's (2006) conceptualization of treatment amenability. Psychopathy has often been considered to be a personality style that is resistant to change, which, if true, would support the utility of psychopathy assessment as part of the determination related to an irreparably corrupt designation.

Metrics

19 Record Views

Details

Logo image