Today, the United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision (Justice Kennedy applying the swing to the majority) decided Miller v. Alabama. The issue in the case was, "Does the imposition of a life-without-parole sentence on a fourteen-year-old child violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments' prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment?"
The answer is "Yes". The Court held that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment forbids the mandatory sentencing of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders. The bottom line -- Children are constitutionally different from adults for sentencing purposes.
An equally big issue in the decision is that the Justices said this decision applies retroactively. This creates a very big procedural issue for the entire country. A list serve I'm a member of indicates that many Bucks County juvenile lawyers and Bucks County criminal defense lawyers will be digging up old files and getting ready to apply the retroactivity of the decision. I have done a quick read of the decision , but my understanding of the case is that a state may choose a remedy so long as that remedy is not unconstitutional. Some remedies include vacating the illegal sentence and freeing the prisoner, vacate the illegal sentence and set the case for resentencing, or declaring the person serving such sentence immediately eligible for parole. These decisions will fall under the state legislature or supreme courts, subject to whatever the state allows for authority under its individual constitutions.