Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States
The United States Supreme Court in Jones vs. Mississippi (2021) reinforced the Miller decision to allow sentencing judges the discretion to determine whether individuals convicted of murder under age 18 warrant a life sentence. The Miller decision dictates individualized sentencing, citing psychosoc...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2023-12-01
|
| Series: | Forensic Science International: Mind and Law |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266635382200042X |
| _version_ | 1797980291069902848 |
|---|---|
| author | Michael Welner Matt DeLisi Heather M. Knous-Westfall David Salsberg Theresa Janusewski |
| author_facet | Michael Welner Matt DeLisi Heather M. Knous-Westfall David Salsberg Theresa Janusewski |
| author_sort | Michael Welner |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The United States Supreme Court in Jones vs. Mississippi (2021) reinforced the Miller decision to allow sentencing judges the discretion to determine whether individuals convicted of murder under age 18 warrant a life sentence. The Miller decision dictates individualized sentencing, citing psychosocial disadvantages, immaturity, potential evolving risk, and how these qualities differ for each defendant. Since the Miller decision, mental health professionals routinely submit forensic reports as part of prisoners’ petitions to courts for reconsideration of their life sentences, either at the request of defense attorneys or prosecutors. This tracks a well-established practice of pre-sentencing evaluations. The expressions of immaturity in crime are not; however, accounted for in the same way that expressions of major mental illness reference years of crime-specific research and diagnostic standardization. For this reason, forensic assessments in this emerging area remain unguided and vulnerable to bias. Here, we present a guide containing 38 questions in seven developmental domains for individualized assessment and 50 questions spanning five domains that relate to the details of the crime. Our qualitative guidelines for assessment of the relevant domains of criminal maturity and offender prognosis draw on the forensic psychiatry, forensic pathology, developmental psychopathology, and criminological literatures, our experiences in comparative research of murder, sex assault and other crimes, as well as decades of experience in forensic assessment. A complete assessment of the offender should include questions in the developmental, scholastic/vocational, social, interpersonal, traumas, antisocial history, and psychiatric/medical domains. We also present recommended questions for assessing the details of the crime to more fully and accurately inform the individualized sentencing requirement in Miller cases. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T05:53:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-98ec4afa788d4779b294dc63a137833a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2666-3538 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T05:53:16Z |
| publishDate | 2023-12-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Forensic Science International: Mind and Law |
| spelling | doaj.art-98ec4afa788d4779b294dc63a137833a2022-12-22T04:42:00ZengElsevierForensic Science International: Mind and Law2666-35382023-12-014100112Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United StatesMichael Welner0Matt DeLisi1Heather M. Knous-Westfall2David Salsberg3Theresa Janusewski4Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, United States; The Forensic Panel, United States; Corresponding author. The Forensic Panel, United States.The Forensic Panel, United States; Iowa State University, United StatesThe Forensic Panel, United StatesThe Forensic Panel, United StatesThe Forensic Panel, United StatesThe United States Supreme Court in Jones vs. Mississippi (2021) reinforced the Miller decision to allow sentencing judges the discretion to determine whether individuals convicted of murder under age 18 warrant a life sentence. The Miller decision dictates individualized sentencing, citing psychosocial disadvantages, immaturity, potential evolving risk, and how these qualities differ for each defendant. Since the Miller decision, mental health professionals routinely submit forensic reports as part of prisoners’ petitions to courts for reconsideration of their life sentences, either at the request of defense attorneys or prosecutors. This tracks a well-established practice of pre-sentencing evaluations. The expressions of immaturity in crime are not; however, accounted for in the same way that expressions of major mental illness reference years of crime-specific research and diagnostic standardization. For this reason, forensic assessments in this emerging area remain unguided and vulnerable to bias. Here, we present a guide containing 38 questions in seven developmental domains for individualized assessment and 50 questions spanning five domains that relate to the details of the crime. Our qualitative guidelines for assessment of the relevant domains of criminal maturity and offender prognosis draw on the forensic psychiatry, forensic pathology, developmental psychopathology, and criminological literatures, our experiences in comparative research of murder, sex assault and other crimes, as well as decades of experience in forensic assessment. A complete assessment of the offender should include questions in the developmental, scholastic/vocational, social, interpersonal, traumas, antisocial history, and psychiatric/medical domains. We also present recommended questions for assessing the details of the crime to more fully and accurately inform the individualized sentencing requirement in Miller cases.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266635382200042Xcriminal maturityMurderHomicideJuvenilesLife without paroleSentencing |
| spellingShingle | Michael Welner Matt DeLisi Heather M. Knous-Westfall David Salsberg Theresa Janusewski Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States Forensic Science International: Mind and Law criminal maturity Murder Homicide Juveniles Life without parole Sentencing |
| title | Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States |
| title_full | Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States |
| title_fullStr | Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States |
| title_full_unstemmed | Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States |
| title_short | Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States |
| title_sort | forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the united states |
| topic | criminal maturity Murder Homicide Juveniles Life without parole Sentencing |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266635382200042X |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT michaelwelner forensicassessmentofcriminalmaturityinjuvenilehomicideoffendersintheunitedstates AT mattdelisi forensicassessmentofcriminalmaturityinjuvenilehomicideoffendersintheunitedstates AT heathermknouswestfall forensicassessmentofcriminalmaturityinjuvenilehomicideoffendersintheunitedstates AT davidsalsberg forensicassessmentofcriminalmaturityinjuvenilehomicideoffendersintheunitedstates AT theresajanusewski forensicassessmentofcriminalmaturityinjuvenilehomicideoffendersintheunitedstates |