Document Type
Brief
Publication Date
8-1-2019
Abstract
Amici Erwin Chemerinsky, Aziz Huq, Leah Litman, David Strauss, Carlos Vazquez, and Larry Yackle are federal courts scholars, studying the operation and purposes of federal jurisdiction and criminal law. Although they have divergent legal and political outlooks, amici share a keen interest in the federal courts, having published extensively on these topics and collected decades of experience examining issues implicated in this case.
This case concerns the scope of the constitutional rule announced in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), and held applicable on collateral review in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016). Respondent Lee Boyd Malvo, who was sentenced to life without parole for crimes committed as a juvenile, maintains that Miller established a substantive rule that renders life without parole disproportionate for the vast majority of juveniles in light of their "diminished culpability and heightened capacity for change," and that he is therefore entitled to a new sentencing proceeding at which his youth will be considered to implement that substantive rule. Miller, 567 U.S. at 479. The substantive character of this rule is precisely why this Court in Montgomery held the Miller rule applied on collateral review under the retroactivity rules set forth in Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 307, 311 (1989), and its progeny.
Recommended Citation
Litman, Leah, "Mathena v. Malvo: Brief Amici Curiae of Erwin Chemerinsky, Aziz Huq, Leah Litman, David Strauss, Carlos Vazquez, and Larry Yackle in Support of Respondent" (2019). Appellate Briefs. 51.
https://repository.law.umich.edu/briefs/51
Comments
Amicus: Chemerinsky, Erwin; Huq, Aziz; Litman, Leah; Strauss, David; Vazquez, Carlos; Yackle, Larry