No. The US Supreme Court ruled in Roper v. Simmons,(2005) that it is unconstitutional to execute an offender for crimes committed while under the age of 18.
This overturned two relatively recent rulings in Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 US 815 (1988) and Stanford v. Kentucky,492 US 361 (1989) that declared executing someone for capital crimes committed while under the age of 16 was a violation of the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, but that executing someone who was at least 16 at the time the crime was committed was constitutional.
The decision in Roper v. Simmons, (2005), overturned death penalty laws in 25 states.
The last known execution of a juvenile in the US was 17-year-old Leonard Shockley, who was put to death in 1959.
The last person to be executed for a crime committed as a juvenile was Scott Allen Hain, in 2003.
NO because juveniles or kids their to young and their minds are not well develop
Another View: In theory I would agree with the above answer - however - I believe that juveniles ABOVE a certain age (e.g.: 15-16 years) ARE sophisticated and developed enough to know and understand the consequences of their actions, and should be eligible for consideration for the death penalty depending on the circumstances of their offense.
Yes, children may receive the death penalty depending on the crime, state, and child in question and only if the child is tried as an adult.
This, of course, is a philosophical discussion question, but in my opinion, yes. A teen, unless ajudged mentally incompetent, is fully aware of the consequences of their actions.
Juveniles can not receive the death penalty in the United States, as decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Roper v Simmons.
No. The US Supreme Court found that executing a juvenile is unconstitutional in Roper v. Simmons in 2004.
3
....
There are many arguments on both sides of the question, and I suspect that the side you come down on will depend as much on emotion and cultural background as on rationally weighing the facts. Given the incidence of murder in societies that have the death penalty, it is obviously not always a deterrent.
The death penalty is giving to thoses who have killed a person.
It is where prisoners who have been given the death penalty are housed. The purpose is to keep them out of the general prison population.
After a person is hanged, the second party is given remedy and the hanged person is justifiably given justice. death penalty is usually given to the persons who commit murder, not only murder but first degree of murder. it is very rare for a person who is convicted of manslaughter to be hanged. if the person is a real murderer it is in the best interest of the society to be hanged. if not so then there is great possibility of the murderer to make the killings his outdoor game.
The number peremptory challenges that are given to attorneys is based on the type of murder trial it is. If it is a capital case, or the prosecution is seeking the death penalty, a total of twenty peremptory challenges is given. In all other cases associated with causing the death of another, either by murder or manslaughter, the government is allowed six peremptory challenges while the defense is allowed ten.
Socrates was given hemlock to drink.
adolf Eichman.
July 22, 2003
Death! It is often given to prisoners with death penalty.
The sentence for murder with a knife can vary depending on the circumstances and location, but it may result in a lengthy prison sentence or even life imprisonment without parole. In some cases, it could also lead to a capital punishment sentence, such as the death penalty.
Socrates.He was given a cup of Hemlock which he drank willingly.