Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

2008AP1139 State v. Ninham

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 20, 2011//

2008AP1139 State v. Ninham

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//May 20, 2011//

Listen to this article

Constitutional Law
Cruel and unusual punishment

Sentencing a 14-year-old to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for committing intentional homicide is not categorically unconstitutional.

“We arrive at our holding by applying the two-step approach employed by the United States Supreme Court, most recently in Graham v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2011 (2010). First, we conclude that Ninham has failed to demonstrate that there is a national consensus against sentencing a 14-year-old to life imprisonment without parole when the crime is intentional homicide. Second, we conclude in the exercise of our own independent judgment that the punishment is not categorically unconstitutional.”

Affirmed.

2008AP1139 State v. Ninham

Ziegler, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Tuerkheimer, Frank M., Madison; Moreno, Peter Shawn, Madison; Stevenson, Bryan, Montgomery, Ala.; Kiley, Rebecca, Montgomery, Ala.; For Respondent: Wellman, Sally L., Madison; Zakowski, John P., Green Bay

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests