Graham v. Florida

Last updated
Graham v. Florida
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued November 9, 2009
Decided May 17, 2010
Full case nameTerrance Jamar Graham v. Florida
Docket no. 08-7412
Citations560 U.S. 48 ( more )
130 S. Ct. 2011; 176 L. Ed. 2d 825
Argument Oral argument
Case history
ProceduralWrit of certiorari to Florida First District Court of Appeal.
Sentencing an individual to life imprisonment without parole for a non-homicide crime committed before the defendant reached the age of 18 violates the Eighth Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens  · Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy  · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg  · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito  · Sonia Sotomayor
Case opinions
MajorityKennedy, joined by Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor
ConcurrenceStevens, joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor
ConcurrenceRoberts (in the judgment)
DissentThomas, joined by Scalia; Alito (as to Parts I and III)
Laws applied
Amendment VIII

Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that juvenile offenders cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for non-homicide offenses. [1] [2]


In June 2012, in the related Miller v. Alabama, the Court ruled that mandatory sentences for life without parole for juvenile offenders, even in cases of murder, was cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. [3]

The case

Terrance Jamar Graham (born January 6, 1987), along with two accomplices, attempted to rob a barbecue restaurant in Jacksonville, Florida in July 2003. [4] Aged 16 at the time, Graham was arrested for the robbery attempt and was charged as an adult for armed burglary with assault and battery, as well as attempted armed robbery. The first charge was a first-degree felony that is punishable by life. He pleaded guilty and his plea was accepted.

Six months later, on December 2, 2004, Graham was arrested again for home invasion robbery. Though Graham denied involvement, he acknowledged that he was in violation of his plea agreement. In 2006, the presiding judge sentenced Graham to life in prison. Because Florida abolished parole, it became effectively a life sentence without parole. [5]

Majority opinion

Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court:

The Constitution prohibits the imposition of a life without parole sentence on a juvenile offender who did not commit homicide. A State need not guarantee the offender eventual release, but if it imposes a sentence of life it must provide him or her with some realistic opportunity to obtain release before the end of that term. The judgment of the First District Court of Appeal of Florida is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. [5]


According to a May 2010 Catholic News Service article, thirty-seven states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have statutes that allow for a possible sentence of life in prison without parole for non-homicide crimes. However, only some of those jurisdictions have persons serving those sentences for non-homicide crimes, and most of those are adults. (According to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in May 2010, 129 people are serving non-parole life sentences for non-homicide crimes which they committed as juveniles, 77 in Florida and the rest held in 10 different states).

The ruling was declared retroactive to cases on collateral review as a "new rule of substantive constitutional law" by the 7th Judicial District Court in Scott County, Iowa, in the case of State v. Jason Means. Means was aged 17 when he was involved in a 1993 kidnapping and homicide. Following a jury trial, Means was convicted of kidnapping and second degree murder. Thereafter, Means was sentenced to life without parole on the kidnapping charge and 90 years consecutive on the second-degree murder and other related charges.

Means challenged his life sentence under Iowa Rule of Criminal Procedure 2.24(5) with the assistance of attorney Angela Fritz Reyes. On September 30, 2010, the district court issued an opinion declaring Graham retroactive. The court re-sentenced Means in absentia to life imprisonment and severed the non-parole portion of Iowa law, thereby granting Means the opportunity for parole. [6] [7]

In at least two cases, state high courts have ruled that life without parole is still appropriate for homicides, no matter what age the defendant. On December 21, 2010, the Supreme Court of Missouri delivered its opinion in the case of State v. Anthony Andrews, affirming a sentence of life imprisonment without parole in a case in which the defendant, Andrews, was a juvenile convicted of first-degree murder. The Wisconsin Supreme Court on May 20, 2011, ruled similarly in State v. Omer Ninham, in a case in which Ninham was convicted as an adult of intentional homicide for a crime committed at the age of 14.

Further developments

In February 2012, Terrance Jamar Graham was re-sentenced by the original trial judge to a 25-year sentence and currently set to be released on 08/16/2025. [8] Graham is currently imprisoned in the New River Correctional Institution. [9]

In March 2012, the Court heard arguments in the case of Miller v. Alabama, concerning the constitutionality of mandatory life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders in cases including murder. The Court issued its ruling on June 25, 2012, striking down the mandatory sentences as cruel and unusual punishments in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. [3]

Related Research Articles

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted persons are to remain in prison either for the rest of their natural life or until pardoned or paroled or otherwise commuted to a fixed term. Crimes for which, in some countries, a person could receive this sentence include murder, attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder, blasphemy, apostasy, terrorism, severe child abuse, rape, child rape, espionage, treason, high treason, drug dealing, drug trafficking, drug possession, human trafficking, severe cases of fraud, severe cases of financial crimes, aggravated criminal damage in English law, and aggravated cases of arson, kidnapping, burglary, or robbery which result in death or grievous bodily harm, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and in certain cases genocide, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, certain war crimes or any three felonies in case of three-strikes law. Life imprisonment can also be imposed, in certain countries, for traffic offenses causing death. The life sentence does not exist in all countries: Portugal was the first to abolish life imprisonment, in 1884.

Measure 11, also known as "One Strike You're Out", was a citizens' initiative passed in 1994 in the U.S. State of Oregon. This statutory enactment established mandatory minimum sentencing for several crimes. The measure was approved in the November 8, 1994 general election with 788,695 votes in favor, and 412,816 votes against.

Capital punishment in the United States Legal penalty in the United States

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 28 states, the federal government, and the military. Its existence can be traced to the beginning of the American colonies. The United States is the only developed Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly. It is one of 54 countries worldwide applying it, and was the first to develop lethal injection as a method of execution, which has since been adopted by five other countries. The Philippines has since abolished executions, and Guatemala has done so for civil offenses, leaving the United States as one of four countries to still use this method. In Japan, the other advanced democracy that routinely performs executions, the preferred method is hanging.

The rule of felony murder is a legal doctrine in some common law jurisdictions that broadens the crime of murder: when an offender kills in the commission of a dangerous or enumerated crime, the offender, and also the offender's accomplices or co-conspirators, may be found guilty of murder.

In the United States, habitual offender laws were first implemented on March 7, 1994 and are part of the United States Justice Department's Anti-Violence Strategy. These laws require both a severe violent felony and two other previous convictions to serve a mandatory life sentence in prison. The purpose of the laws is to drastically increase the punishment of those convicted of more than two serious crimes.

Lionel Tate American criminal

Lionel Alexander Tate is the youngest American citizen ever sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. In January 2001, when Tate was 13, he was convicted of first-degree murder for the 1999 battering death of 6-year-old Tiffany Eunick in Broward County, Florida.

Mandatory sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term for certain crimes, commonly serious and violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed while under the age of 18. The 5–4 decision overruled Stanford v. Kentucky, in which the court had upheld execution of offenders at or above age 16, and overturned statutes in 25 states.

Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977), held that the death penalty for rape of an adult woman was grossly disproportionate and excessive punishment, and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. A few states continued to have child rape statutes that authorized the death penalty. In Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), the court expanded Coker, ruling that the death penalty is unconstitutional in all cases that do not involve murder or crimes against the State.

The Hamilton Avenue Murders is the colloquial name for the mass murder of seven people in a house at 560 North Hamilton Avenue in Indianapolis, Indiana, on June 1, 2006.

In the United States, 1 in every 2,000 inhabitants are imprisoned for life. There are many U.S. states in which a convict can be released on parole after a decade or more has passed, but in California, people sentenced to life imprisonment can normally apply for parole after seven years. The laws in the United States divide life sentences between "determinate life sentences" and "indeterminate life sentences." For example, sentences of "15 years to life," "25 years to life," or "life with mercy" may be given, which is called an "indeterminate life sentence." A sentence of "life without the possibility of parole" or "life without mercy" is called a "determinate life sentence" because a sentence of "15 years to life" means that it is a life sentence with a non-parole period of 15 years. Parole is not guaranteed but discretionary and so that is an indeterminate sentence. Even if a sentence specifically denies the possibility of parole, government officials may have the power to grant an amnesty, to reprieve, or to commute a sentence to time served.

Criminal sentencing in the United States

In the United States, sentencing law varies by jurisdiction. Since the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, all sentences in the US must conform to the requirements of the Constitution, which sets basic mandates while leaving the bulk of policy-making up to the states.

Life imprisonment in Canada is a criminal sentence for certain offences that has an indeterminate length and is the most severe punishment for any crime in the country. Criminal laws allowing for life imprisonment are enacted by the Parliament of Canada and apply uniformly across the country.

2009 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down nineteen per curiam opinions during its 2009 term, which began on October 5, 2009, and concluded October 3, 2010.

Murder in Canada is defined as a culpable homicide with specific intentions. It is defined by the Criminal Code, a statute passed by the Parliament of Canada and which applies uniformly across Canada.

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that mandatory sentences of life without the possibility of parole are unconstitutional for juvenile offenders. The ruling applied even to those persons who had committed murder as a juvenile, extending beyond Graham v. Florida (2010), which had ruled juvenile life without parole sentences unconstitutional for crimes excluding murder.

Kristina Joy Fetters was an Iowa woman who was convicted of the murder of her 73-year-old great-aunt, Arlene Klehm, on October 25, 1994, when she was 14 years old. At age 15, Fetters became the youngest woman in Iowa sentenced to life in prison without parole on December 18, 1995. Following the 2012 Supreme Court decision of Miller v. Alabama, which declared mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders to be unconstitutional, Fetters became the first inmate in Iowa to be re-sentenced in November 2013. The following month, she was recommended for compassionate parole due to a prognosis of inoperable stage-four breast cancer, and she was released to a hospice care center in Des Moines, Iowa in December 2013. She succumbed to her cancer in July 2014, at age 34.

Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that its previous ruling in Miller v. Alabama (2012), that a mandatory life sentence without parole should not apply to persons convicted of murder committed as juveniles, should be applied retroactively. This decision potentially affects up to 2,300 cases nationwide.

Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010

The Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010 is an Act of Parliament in New Zealand that denies parole to certain repeat offenders and to offenders guilty of the worse murders, and imposes maximum terms of imprisonment on persistent repeat offenders who continue to commit serious violent offences. The law is known informally in New Zealand public, media and government circles as the "three-strikes law".


  1. Liptak, Adam (May 17, 2010), "Justices Limit Life Sentences for Juveniles", New York Times .
  2. Bravin, Jess (May 18, 2010), "Justices Restrict Life Terms for Youths", Wall Street Journal .
  3. 1 2 Archived 2013-06-30 at
  4. Vaughan, Kelly. "Graham v. Florida (08-7412); Sullivan v. Florida (08-7621)". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2017-11-17.
  5. 1 2 Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).
  6. "State of Iowa v. Jason Means" (PDF). Iowa District Court, Scott County. September 30, 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 7, 2011. Retrieved October 26, 2010.
  7. Wellner, Brian (2013-08-28). "Man convicted in 1993 murder to be re-sentenced". The Quad-City Times. Retrieved 2018-12-11.
  8. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2012-07-12.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)

Further reading