Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38845089›Full record

ArticleJournal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence2025

Life after life: Recidivism among individuals formerly sentenced to mandatory juvenile life without parole.

Colleen Sbeglia, Cortney Simmons, Grace Icenogle, Marsha Levick, Monica Peniche, Jordan Beardslee, Elizabeth Cauffman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Life after life: Recidivism among individuals formerly sentenced to mandatory juvenile life without parole.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Colleen SbegliaUniversity of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8389-5679
Cortney SimmonsArizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5457-4681
Grace IcenogleWashington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families, Washington, USA.
Marsha LevickJuvenile Law Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Monica PenicheUniversity of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.
Jordan BeardsleeUniversity of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.
Elizabeth CauffmanUniversity of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Miller v. Alabama (2012), the Supreme Court abolished mandatory juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) sentences and subsequently decided that the ruling applied retroactively (Montgomery v. Louisiana, 2016), effectively rendering thousands of inmates eligible for resentencing and potential release from prison. In its decisions, the Court cited developmental science, noting that youth, by virtue of their transient immaturity, are less culpable and more amenable to rehabilitation relative to their adult counterparts. Specifically, the Court notes adolescents' propensity for impulsive action, sensitivity to social influence, and difficulty understanding long-term consequences. Even so, these rulings raised concerns regarding the consequences of releasing prisoners who had committed heinous crimes as juveniles. Several years after the Court's decision, preliminary data are now available to shed light on rates of recidivism among those released. The current paper comprises three goals. First, we discuss the science of adolescent development and how it intersects with legal practice, contextualizing the Court's decision. Second, we present recidivism data from a sample of individuals formerly sentenced to JLWOP in Pennsylvania who were resentenced and released under Miller and Montgomery (N = 287). Results indicate that 15 individuals received new criminal charges up to 7 years postrelease (5.2%), the majority of which were nonviolent offenses. This low rate of recidivism is consistent with the developmental science documenting compromised decision-making during the adolescent years, followed by desistance from criminal behavior in adulthood. Lastly, we discuss the importance of interdisciplinary collaborations between researchers and legal practitioners, as well as critical future avenues of research in this area.

Indexed as

Adolescent BehaviorAdolescent DevelopmentJuvenile DelinquencyPrisonersRecidivismAdolescentFemaleHumansMaleSupreme Court DecisionsYoung Adultadolescenceculpabilitydevelopmentjuvenileslegal policy

Identifiers

PMID38845089
PMCPMC11758475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.