Summarize these four cases and their roles in the juvenile justice system. In other words, what was their impact on how we carry out juvenile justice today? Explain your answer.

• Roper V. Simmons
• Kent V. U.S
• Graham V. Florida
• In re Gault

Romper v. Simmons- The defendant was sentenced to death at age of 17. This was appealed but it was rejected. However, in 2002, the Supreme court in Missouri stayed Simmons's execution. The case was decided using the reasoning in Atkin's case. It was held that execution of minors was unconstitutional.

Kent V. U.S- The appellant a 16 year old was detained and interrogated by police regarding crimes of rape and robbery. After the appellant admitted some involvement, the court waived juvenile jurisdiction and was tried as an adult. He was indicted in a district court but he moved to dismiss the indictment but the juvenile court failed to conduct full investigations before waiving the said jurisdiction. The jury found him guilty and sentenced him for 30-90 years in prison. Upon Appeal, the Appellate court noted that the Juvenile Court failed to provide reason for waiver.

Graham V Florida- The appellant a 16 year old was convicted for armed burglary and attempted robbery. He served 12 months sentence and was released. After 10 months, he was charged with robbery by a Florida state court and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. On appeal he argued that this violated the Eight Amendment the court disagreed hence faced life sentence without parole.

In re Gault- Gault was arrested for making an obscene phone call at the age of 15. He had been previously placed on Probation and his parents didn't receive any notices from the police at the time of arrest. He was committed to industrial school until he was 21 years of age.

Police officers don't have to detain minors. If this is done, they ought to wait until the parents arrive but this wasn't the case in Re Gault as he was arrested in absence of parents and no notice had been given to them or guardians. States like New York placed statutes in place that places criminal responsibility to be the age of 18. This is known as 'Raise of Age Law'. Any child below the age of 18 ought to be tried as a juvenile and not as an adult as opposed to the circumstance in Kent V U.S. Therefore, juveniles are tried separately. Capital punishment for children below the age of 18 is unconstitutional since the law doesn't even recognize them as voters why the capital punishment? Children ought to be treated different from adults hence this is a violation of human rights. Therefore, for murder trials, children are not treated as adults hence protected by Constitution.