No. 18-9123

Jovan McClenton v. California

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2019-05-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: discretion due-process eighth-amendment miller-v-alabama sentencing de-novo-resentencing discretionary-sentencing eighth-amendment hallmark-features-of-youth juvenile-offenders juvenile-sentencing miller-factors miller-v-alabama proportionality
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2019-06-13
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is de novo resentencing required where lengthy, fully determinate sentences, primarily based on the discretion of the trial court, were imposed on juvenile offenders without consideration of the 'hallmark features of youth' set forth by this Court in Miller v. Alabama (2012) 567 U.S. 460[132 S. Ct. 2455] (Miller)?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Is de novo resentencing required where lengthy, fully determinate sentences, primarily based on the discretion of the trial court, were imposed on juvenile offenders without consideration of the “hallmark features of youth” set forth by this Court in Miller v. Alabama (2012) 567 U.S. 460[132 S. Ct. 2455] (Miller)? i

Docket Entries

2019-06-17
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-05-13
Waiver of right of respondent California, et al. to respond filed.
2019-04-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 3, 2019)

Attorneys

California, et al.
Louis Ward KarlinCalifornia Deparment of Justice, Office of the Att, Respondent
Louis Ward KarlinCalifornia Deparment of Justice, Office of the Att, Respondent
Jovan McClenton
Leslie Beth RingoldLos Angeles County Public Defender, Petitioner
Leslie Beth RingoldLos Angeles County Public Defender, Petitioner