Whether the Eighth Amendment forbids a sentencing court from applying a presumption in favor of life without parole for a juvenile offender

QUESTION PRESENTED The Eighth Amendment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile offenders. Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 479 (2012). While there is no categorical ban on life without parole for this type of crime, a sentencing court must consider how children are different and only impose life without parole in the “uncommon” and “rare” case in which a juvenile’s crime is the product of irreparable corruption. State courts are deeply divided on whether this requires a presumption against a sentence of life without parole for a juvenile convicted of homicide, or whether an individual court is at liberty to apply a presumption in favor of life without parole. Emmett Garrison was sentenced to life without parole for his participation as a principal to second degree murder, which he committed prior to his 18th birthday. In imposing the harshest available penalty, the sentencing court applied a presumption in favor of life without parole and required Emmett Garrison to prove he deserved parole eligibility. This approach is inconsistent with the Eighth Amendment and recent jurisprudence from this Court, and it is internally inconsistent with approaches taken by different district courts within Louisiana. Without further guidance, the protections granted under the Eighth Amendment in a juvenile sentencing hearing will arbitrarily vary depending on the location in which the juvenile is sentenced. This case thus presents the following question: 1. Ifthe Eighth Amendment forbids automatic life without parole sentences for juvenile offenders, does a sentencing court have the discretion to impose a presumption in favor of life without parole? 2