After swift cert denial in Rivera-Ruperto, should I just give up hoping for an improved Eighth Amendment to check extreme non-capital sentences?
Intrepid readers may realize that I have paid close attention to a case out of the First Circuit, US v. Rivera–Ruperto, because I thought it involved extraordinarily facts that made for a compelling Cruel and Unusual Punishments argument if that clause was to function as even the most minimal check on the imposition of extreme prison sentences on adult offenders. But, frustratingly, today's Supreme Court order list has under a long list of cert denials "18-5384 Rivera-Ruperto, Wendell v. United States." Grrrr.
Of course, I was not the only one who thought this was was exceptional: as noted here, the entire First Circuit issued a remarkable opinion last year while denying en banc review (available here) in which Judge Barron spoke for all his colleagues in urging the Justices to take up the Rivera-Ruperto to reconsider its Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. I was sincerely hoping that this unusual statement from an entire circuit might at least get Rivera-Ruperto a single relist from the Supreme Court or maybe just a short statement from some Justices about the issue. A single relist or a statement about a denial of cert would suggest that there was at least a single Justice who might think that a toothless Eighth Amendment is a problem in an era of mass incarceration. (Tellingly, the legal press and criminal justice twitterverse has also entirely ignored this case, confirming my fears that one need to be a murderer on death row before just about anyone gets interested in an Eighth Amendment claim.)
I still want to hope that maybe a district court or the First Circuit could find a way to do better in this case when Wendell Rivera-Ruperto eventually brings a 2255 claim (which could now juice an Eighth Amendment argument, as I suggested here, on the fact that the FIRST STEP Act has changed the federal law that lead to his 130 years of mandatory-minimum prison time). But even if Rivera-Ruperto is able to get some relief eventually, I am still this morning left deeply troubled by the notion that not a single Justice seems to be at all concerned about modern Eighth Amendment jurisprudence relating to extreme non-capital sentences. Sigh.
A few prior related posts:
- Extended dissent laments First Circuit panel's rejection of Eighth Amendment attack on 160-year sentence for stash house participant
- Entire First Circuit urges Supreme Court to revisit Harmelin's limits on Eighth Amendment challenges to extreme adult prison sentence
- With Justice Kennedy retiring, overturning Harmelin should become a focal point for criminal justice reformers
- Doesn't the FIRST STEP Act add juice to Eighth Amendment challenge to extreme stacked 924(c) sentence in Rivera-Ruperto?
Comments
Post a Comment