Rehabilitating Juvenile Life Without Parole: An Analysis of Miller v. Alabama

18 Sep 2013 10:08pm Anna K. Christensen 

Is Twenty-Two Years Enough for the “Millennium Bomber”?: The Threat of Terrorism to Appellate Review of Sentences

03 Sep 2013 11:38pm Robin Kuntz 

A Second Shot at Proving Murder: Sacrificing Double Jeopardy for Rigid Formalism in Blueford v. Arkansas

03 Sep 2013 11:37pm Jalem Peguero 

Third-year law student Jalem Peguero argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Blueford v. Arkansas  trades constitutional protection for rigid formalism.  The Blueford Court sanctioned the retrial of criminal defendants for offenses where a jury did not formally acquit the defendant; accordingly, Peguero claims, the Court prevented even clear statements by jury forepersons in open court about the finality of their decisions from operating to protect a defendant from "Double Jeopardy."

This case note is one of seven written by California Law Review members for Circuit's first case note program. 

Children Are Different: Bridging the Gap Between Rhetoric and Reality Post Miller v. Alabama

26 Aug 2013 06:09pm Ioana Tchoukleva 

Current CLR member Ioana Tchoukleva examines the Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. Alabama, which prohibited mandatory sentences of life without parole for juvenile homicide offenders under the Eighth Amendment, and discusses the implications of the Court's holding on the future of juvenile rights. 

This case note is one of seven written by California Law Review members for Circuit's first case note program.

« PREVIOUS; 4   |   5   |   6   |   7   |   8 NEXT »


The California Law Review is the preeminent legal publication at the UC Berkeley School of Law.
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.