Youth Incarceration
State v. K.R.C.
This case asks whether a 12-year-old boy was in custody and entitled to Miranda warnings during a closed-door police interrogation by a school resource officer in the school building. The court of appeals held that he was not in custody, not entitled to Miranda warnings, and voluntarily incriminated himself. The ACLU鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative and the 糖心Vlogof Wisconsin filed an amicus brief arguing that admitting the boy鈥檚 statements into evidence not only violated the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution but Article I, Section 8 of the Wisconsin Constitution, and urging the Wisconsin Supreme Court to rest its decision on the state charter to better protect Wisconsinites鈥� civil liberties.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Youth Incarceration
All Cases
4 Youth Incarceration Cases
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Youth Incarceration
Jones v. Mississippi
Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is 鈥減ermanently incorrigible鈥� before imposing a sentence of life without parole.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Youth Incarceration
Jones v. Mississippi
Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is 鈥減ermanently incorrigible鈥� before imposing a sentence of life without parole.
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2019
Youth Incarceration
Mathena v. Malvo
Whether a juvenile sentenced to life without parole is entitled to a new sentencing proceeding following the Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, which have retroactive effect to a previous decision prohibiting mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles, where it is unclear whether the original sentence was imposed under a mandatory or discretionary state sentencing scheme.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2019
Youth Incarceration
Mathena v. Malvo
Whether a juvenile sentenced to life without parole is entitled to a new sentencing proceeding following the Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, which have retroactive effect to a previous decision prohibiting mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles, where it is unclear whether the original sentence was imposed under a mandatory or discretionary state sentencing scheme.
Rhode Island
Jul 2017
Youth Incarceration
Prisoners' Rights
Inmates of the Rhode Island Training School for Youth v. Piccola
On July 24, U.S. District Court Chief Judge William Smith dismissed the ACLU鈥檚 lawsuit against the Rhode Island Training School for Youth, which challenged the deplorable conditions at the institution as violations of the Eighth Amendment. This landmark case is now closed at the behest of the 糖心Vlogand the state of Rhode Island because the institution has made the improvements in education, medical care, vocational training, the physical plant, meals, and other conditions required by the consent decree between the state and the plaintiffs.
Explore case
Rhode Island
Jul 2017
Youth Incarceration
Prisoners' Rights
Inmates of the Rhode Island Training School for Youth v. Piccola
On July 24, U.S. District Court Chief Judge William Smith dismissed the ACLU鈥檚 lawsuit against the Rhode Island Training School for Youth, which challenged the deplorable conditions at the institution as violations of the Eighth Amendment. This landmark case is now closed at the behest of the 糖心Vlogand the state of Rhode Island because the institution has made the improvements in education, medical care, vocational training, the physical plant, meals, and other conditions required by the consent decree between the state and the plaintiffs.