Summary Of The Cole Cannon Case

Facts: The Petitioner Evan Miller along with his co-defendant, Colby Smith, brutally beat and robbed their neighbor, Cole Cannon, as well as set his trailer ablaze the night of July 15th, 2003. Throughout that night, Miller and Smith were in and out of Cannon’s trailer. They were there the first time looking for drugs but when they couldn’t find any they took Cannon’s baseball cards instead. Late that evening they returned where Cannon fell unconscious due to the consumption of drugs and alcohol. Aware of this, Miller stole approximately $300 as well as his driver license at which point Cannon regained consciousness. Cannon began attacking Miller and then Smith struck Cannon with a baseball bat. Miller repeatedly beat Cannon until he no longer

Noted that there is no way to predict or ultimately guarantee that 100% of juveniles sent to prison are new and refined citizens of society by the time that they are released. But the states should not forbid someone, let alone a teenager, the chance to prove that they can be a greater individual for themselves and for the public. This also gives the public the ability to not only heal but to possibly forgive the juvenile for the crimes that they have committed and accept them back into their community. To support this the Court claims that when an individual, especially a teenager, receives a sentence of life without parole, it numbs their humanity. It diminishes the chance for the youth to reform in any positive way because they lack the hope to continue with their lives. Even though life without parole sentences are no longer mandatory and give youths the chance to not have to spend the rest of their lives in prison, it does mean however that a different judge in any state can use this sentence as freely as they wish. The Court reasoning for this is so judges can take the time to review the entirety of a juvenile’s life and circumstance before making the decision to take their hope for life from

That despite the horrific act that Miller had committed if the criminal justice system were to express a level of mercy, he may become a better person because of it. The phrase “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society”, can be coined from a past Eighth Amendment-related case in 1958, Trop v. Dulles. This phrase means doing the decent thing would be to express mercy on the guilty and a society that is maturing may possibly believe that harsh punishments are unwarranted by vacating or reconsidering them. It is important to not confuse expressing decency with leniency. In the past 20th century there has been a huge shift for more rehabilitation and parole availability for sentencing rather than the opposite. Society is dissatisfied due to the evolving violent crime rate since the 80s’, therefore, courts have been providing and urging longer sentences and harsher punishments for criminals to keep them from committing more crimes. Ultimately the majority agrees that before applying the harshest penalty of life without parole, the judge must at the very least consider all the circumstances that have led up to the juvenile committing the crime no matter how horrific in nature. “The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment ‘guarantees individuals the