Baggett v. Bean (Amicus)

  • Filed: January 12, 2026
  • Status: Ongoing
  • Court: Eighth Judicial District Court
  • Latest Update: Jan 12, 2026
Red-tinted graphic featuring the ACLU of Nevada logo and the text ‘Baggett v. Bean.’ The background shows a row of prison cells with barred doors along a corridor,

Despite only being 19 when accused of murder, Johnny Baggett was sentenced to two consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole. He filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenging his unconstitutional detention and raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel that prevented him from proving his innocence.

In conjunction with the Juvenile Law Center, we filed an amicus brief in support of his petition, arguing that sentencing a 19-year-old to life without parole violates the Nevada Constitution's ban on cruel or unusual punishment.

The Nevada Constitution provides stronger protections than the federal standard. While the Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment," Nevada prohibits punishment that is "cruel or unusual." Courts in other states have relied on similar language to strike down life without parole sentences for older adolescents, including those up to age 20. Research shows that young people in this age group share key developmental traits with those under 18, including a greater capacity for growth and change. Because of this, states across the country are expanding protections, including access to parole and resentencing.

Given this growing body of research and legal precedent, Nevada courts should recognize that sentencing young people like Baggett to die in prison is unconstitutional.


The ACLU of Nevada does not represent the parties in this case, and our involvement is limited to filing an amicus curiae brief, also known as a “friend of the court” brief, which allows us to share legal arguments, policy expertise, and broader civil liberties perspectives that may assist the court in making its decision. We file these briefs in cases that may have significant implications for constitutional rights and civil liberties, even when we are not directly representing the client or parties named in the lawsuit.

Case Number:
A-24-894507-W
Judge:
Hon. Jasmin Lilly-Spells
Attorney(s):
Christopher Peterson, Esq.