Professor Deborah Denno, founding director of the Neuroscience and Law Center, discusses young adult cognition, as it applies to death row inmates, in an article for Bloomberg Law.
Citing Roper‘s recognition that qualities distinguishing juveniles from adults don’t disappear at age 18—Kennedy concluded that “a line must be drawn” nonetheless—Wardlow argues that those qualities can’t be appreciated in a jury’s future dangerousness analysis for young adults, either.
A leading law and neuroscience expert not involved in the case called Wardlow’s claim “incredibly strong.”
There’s been “a sea change in the scientific community’s view of human cognition generally, and juvenile/young adult cognition specifically, over the quarter-century since Billy Wardlow was convicted of murder and sentenced to death,” said Fordham Law professor Deborah Denno, founding director of its Neuroscience and Law Center.
“While Texas’s future dangerousness aggravator has been criticized over the decades—most notably by the psychiatric community—its singular application in a case involving an 18-year-old is particularly disturbing,” Denno said.
