1. Should this Court afford Eighth Amendment protection to youthful
offenders based on this Coprt's own precedent and national
census that youth is a mitigating factor against the states harshest
penalty since this category of offenders are in a transitional stage
in life, lack fixed character and are distinguished from mature adults?

2. Should this Court find the lower courts committed error in failing
to apply the Eighth Amendment categorical rule approach to Petitoners
Eighth Amendment claims that there is a national census that youthful
offenders are distinguished in the law and society from mature adults,
and that their class would serve a disproportionate amount of their
lives in prison than mature adults offenders that commit the same
offense?

3. Does the Eighth Amendment treat 18-20 year olds as mature adults or
youths deserving protection from life without parole sanctions?

Should this Court afford Eighth Amendment protection to youthful offenders based on this Court's own precedent and national census that youth is a mitigating factor against the states harshest penalty since this category of offenders are in a transitional stage in life, lack fixed character and are distinguished from mature adults?