skip navigation


Abstract Database

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

To download this abstract, check the box next to the NCJ number then click the "Back To Search Results" link. Then, click the "Download" button on the Search Results page. Also see the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 199741 Find in a Library
Title: Juvenile Death Penalty: Is It "Cruel and Unusual" in Light of Contemporary Standards?
Journal: Criminal Justice  Volume:17  Issue:4  Dated:Winter 2003  Pages:21-23
Author(s): Adam Caine Ortiz
Date Published: 2003
Page Count: 3
Document: HTML
Type: Issue Overview
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article reviews the current debate concerning subjecting juvenile offenders to the death penalty.
Abstract: The author begins by describing two cases in which juveniles were sentenced to death in Missouri and Texas. In the Missouri case, the State supreme court granted a temporary stay of execution to determine whether the juvenile’s death would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. In the Texas case, the juvenile, Napoleon Beazley, was executed; his filings to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and to the governor were denied. Next, the author discusses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Atkins v. Virginia, in which executions of offenders with mental retardation was banned. This is a step toward banning the executions of juveniles because the Court clarified criteria involving an evolving standard of decency in society and whether the death penalty measurably contributes to its goal of retribution and deterrence. The author points out that only two nations currently sanction the death penalty for juveniles: the United States and Iran. According to the article, the world community considers the practice of executing juveniles “gravely inconsistent with prevailing standards of decency.” The author next turns to a discussion of recent scientific studies that have mapped the growth of the brain from childhood through adulthood. These studies have shown that the area of the brain governing inhibition and goal-directed behavior is not fully developed until the ages of 18 to 22. As such, advocates argue that to hold juveniles to the same standards as adults is unreasonable and that, thus, the death penalty for juveniles represents cruel and unusual punishment.
Main Term(s): Juvenile capital punishment
Index Term(s): Cruel and unusual punishment; Juvenile justice system; Missouri; State juvenile justice systems; Texas; Virginia
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.