A Thunderous Dissonance: The Systemic Abandonment of Rehabilitation for Florida Juvenile Offenders — An Examination of Florida Policy in Light of Graham and Sullivan

From both a national perspective beginning with precedent found in In re Gault and reaffirmed in Roper v. Simmons, as well captured in juvenile law in Florida, it has been recognized that the juvenile system should be focused on rehabilitation and a not upon Retributivist approach. Research shows that many harsh punishments for juvenile offenders are not only inappropriate because of developmental, cognitive, social, and ethical concerns but also have no measurable effect on reducing juvenile criminality and may in fact increase recidivism. Despite this, Florida in particular continues to focus on a punitive system for juvenile offenders as illustrated by both the volume of juveniles direct filed into the adult system and by the sentencing of juveniles to life imprisonment without parole for non-capital offenses at a rate drastically higher than the national average. Two juvenile life without parole cases for non-capital offenses are currently before the U.S. Supreme Court on an Eight Amendment from Florida. Florida has punitive sentencing practices that have resulted in negative outcomes for Florida juvenile offenders, criticism of Florida policy, and which are simply fundamentally at odds with the long-standing paradigm that juvenile offenders must be treated differently than their adult counterparts. While the constitutionality of sentencing juveniles to life without the possibility of parole for non-capital offenses has not yet been decided by the Court, the same principles of proportionality found in Roper v. Simmons should also apply to the juvenile LWOP analysis under the Eighth Amendment. While we cannot know how the Court will rule in Graham or Sullivan, I argue that juvenile LWOP is regardless an abandonment of a meaningful commitment to rehabilitation for juvenile offenders and Florida must re-examine its policies in light of more rehabilitative and effective models. In general, my article seeks to conduct a more up to date examination of the Florida juvenile justice approach, focusing on the dissonance between the ideals of rehabilitation first espoused in Gault, and the reality of a very punitive juvenile justice system. This will be illustrated by highlighting how Florida is very out of step with the rest of the nation in terms of sentencing policies and more specifically, in light of two juvenile cases from Florida currently pending before the Supreme Court dealing with the constitutionality of sentencing juveniles to life without parole for non-capital crimes. The most recent study of this issue shows that Florida sentenced juveniles to LWOP for non-homicide offenses at 19 times the rate expected based on analysis of other comparable states. Florida currently has the largest number of juveniles serving LWOP in the nation. My argument is — in essence — that Florida’s punitive approach to juvenile justice is at odds with the concept of rehabilitation and that all current research demonstrates that a retributivist approach does not help reduce juvenile crime nor deter it, as it does not address the root causes of juvenile crime.