The Background of Roper v. Simmons (2004) In 1993, a minor – aged 17 – named Christopher Simmons had both planned and undertaken the murder of a female victim named Shirley Crook; Simmons entered the home of the victim, committed robbery, bound the victim, and proceeded to throw her off of a bridge in a nearby state park. Serv. 03–633. The case of Roper v. Simmons in the United States Supreme Court featured the defendant Christopher Simmons and the plaintiff, Roper, who was the acting prosecutor for the state of Missouri. Juvenile Law Center filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of a Missouri juvenile who was convicted of homicide and sentenced to death. The Roper v. Simmons was decided on March 1st of 2005. Justice Kennedy went on to say, “it is the court’s reasoning that makes this case controversial, due to evolving standards of decency” (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U. S. 551 2005) since the ruling in Stanford v. Kentucky (1989), the Court has grounds to rule against the juvenile death penalty. Court. 543 U.S. 551 (2005) Case number. U.S. Supreme Court. ROPER, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER v. SIMMONS CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI. Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) 125 S.Ct. ROPER, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER v. SIMMONS. Roper V Simmons Supreme Court Decision. After he had turned 18, he was sentenced to death. The Missouri Supreme Court agreed. 03—633. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. At age 17, respondent Simmons planned and committed a capital murder. This example Roper v. Simmons Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. State ex rel. Scott, Charles L. “Roper v. Simmons: Can Juvenile Offenders Be Executed?” Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, v.35 (2007). Simmons.” Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, v.35 (2007). In Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989), a divided Court rejected the proposition that the Constitution bars capital punishment for juvenile offenders in this age group. Argued October 13, 2004–Decided March 1, 2005. Roper v. Simmons Date. Graham v. Florida stands as the midpoint in the Court’s evolution on the Eighth Amendment between its decision to ban capital punishment for juveniles in Roper v. Simmons 543 U.S. 551 (2005), and its decision (two years after this case was decided) to ban life-without-parole sentences for juvenile homicide offenders in Miller v. July 19, 2004. Roper v. Simmons Argued October 13, 2004 – Decided March 1, 2005 Facts In September of 1993, Christopher Simmons broke into the suburban St. Louis home of Shirley Crook with the intention to rob and possibly kill her.Simmons and a friend tied the victim up with duct tape and drove her to a nearby state park. Get Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), United States Supreme Court, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. State of origin. 03–633.Argued October 13, 2004—Decided March 1, 2005. At age 17, respondent Simmons planned and committed a capital murder. Simmons filed a new petition for state postconviction relief, arguing that the reasoning of Atkins established that the Constitution prohibits the execution of a juvenile who was under 18 when the crime was committed. At the age of 17, when he was still a junior in high school, Christopher Simmons, the … Simmons v. Roper, 112 S. W. 3d 397 (2003) (en banc Daily Op. ROPER V. SIMMONS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. After he had turned 18, he was sentenced to death. I. 1183, 161 L.Ed.2d 1, 73 USLW 4153, 05 Cal. Type. Missouri. 2 ROPER v. SIMMONS Syllabus 815, 818–838, a plurality determined that national standards of de-cency did not permit the execution of any offender under age 16 at the time of the crime. At the park, Simmons pushed the victim, who was still alive, off of a bridge … certiorari to the supreme court of missouri. The next year, in Stanford, a 5-to-4 Court re-ferred to contemporary standards of decency, but … No. We reconsider the question. No. Roper v. Simmons: The Verdict. Citation. Amicus Curiae.