Arnold Shelby, Flack Dan, Heilbrun Kirk
Department of Psychology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Behav Sci Law. 2018 Sep;36(5):576-586. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2375. Epub 2018 Oct 18.
Recent United States Supreme Court decisions in Miller v. Alabama (2012) and Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016) have created the need to resentence individuals who received a sentence of mandatory life without parole (LWOP) for offenses committed when they were younger than 18 years old. Neither of these decisions explicitly cite reoffense risk as a sentencing criterion, but a careful reading of the reasoning in these cases suggests that such a risk should be among the considerations addressed by resentencing courts. If so, important theoretical and scientific questions are raised about the nature of risk assessment tools, in particular the distinction between static and dynamic risk factors. Additionally, the novelty of LWOP resentencing raises further questions about the applicability of these tools to individuals who have been incarcerated for long periods of time. We address these questions, call for additional research on dynamic risk factors, and offer recommendations for professionals involved in these types of assessments.
美国最高法院近期在米勒诉阿拉巴马州案（2012年）和蒙哥马利诉路易斯安那州案（2016年）中的裁决，使得有必要对那些在18岁以下犯罪时被判处强制性终身监禁且不得假释（LWOP）的个人重新量刑。这两项裁决均未明确将再犯罪风险作为量刑标准，但仔细研读这些案件的推理过程可以发现，这种风险应是重新量刑法院考虑的因素之一。如果是这样，就会引发有关风险评估工具性质的重要理论和科学问题，尤其是静态风险因素和动态风险因素之间的区别。此外，LWOP重新量刑的新颖性还引发了关于这些工具对长期被监禁者适用性的更多问题。我们将探讨这些问题，呼吁对动态风险因素进行更多研究，并为参与此类评估的专业人员提供建议。
