Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-9646.pdf
Page Number: 36

Cite as:  567 U. S. ____ (2012) 

5 

BREYER, J., concurring 

not),  nor  did  he  need  to  have  intent  to  kill  or  even  “ex-
treme indifference.”  As long as one of the teenage accom-
plices  in  the  robbery  acted  with  extreme  indifference  to 
the  value  of  human  life,  Jackson  could  be  convicted  of 
capital murder.  Ibid. 

The  upshot  is  that  Jackson,  who  did  not  kill  the  clerk, 
might  not  have  intended  to  do  so  either.    See  Jackson  v. 
Norris,  2011  Ark.  49,  at  10,  ___  S. W.  3d  ___  (Danielson, 
J., dissenting) (“[A]ny evidence of [Jackson’s] intent to kill 
was  severely  lacking”).    In  that  case,  the  Eighth  Amend-
ment  simply  forbids  imposition  of  a  life  term  without  the
possibility  of  parole.    If,  on  remand,  however,  there  is  a 
finding that Jackson did intend to cause the clerk’s death,
the  question  remains  open  whether  the  Eighth  Amend-
ment prohibits the imposition of life without parole upon a 
juvenile in those circumstances as well.  Ante, at 17.