Budder v. Addison
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4988
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- In August 2009, 16-year-old Keighton Budder raped and repeatedly stabbed a 17-year-old victim; he was convicted of two counts of first-degree rape, one count of assault and battery with a deadly weapon, and one count of forcible oral sodomy.
- Trial court sentenced Budder to two life-without-parole terms for the rapes, life with parole for the assault, and 20 years for forcible sodomy, all to run consecutively.
- After Graham v. Florida was decided, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA) modified the two life-without-parole sentences to life with parole but left all sentences consecutive, yielding an effective parole-eligibility date 131.75 years later.
- Budder sought rehearing and then federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, arguing his aggregate sentence violated the Eighth Amendment as interpreted in Graham.
- The federal district court denied relief; on appeal the Tenth Circuit reviewed whether the OCCA’s decision was contrary to clearly established Supreme Court precedent under AEDPA § 2254(d)(1).
- The Tenth Circuit concluded Budder’s consecutive life sentences (and parole ineligibility) fall within Graham’s categorical rule and reversed, directing resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Budder's Argument | Oklahoma's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Graham’s categorical ban on life-without-parole for juvenile nonhomicide offenders applies to life sentences that effectively foreclose parole though not labeled LWOP | Graham prohibits any sentence that denies a realistic opportunity for release to juvenile nonhomicide offenders; Budder’s 131.75-year wait is equivalent to LWOP | State urged that labeling and structuring of sentences (life with parole, consecutive terms) distinguish this case from Graham | Held for Budder — Graham covers any sentence that denies a realistic opportunity for release regardless of labels; OCCA decision was contrary to clearly established law |
| Whether Graham’s rule is limited by number/severity of nonhomicide offenses (e.g., multiple rapes/charges) | Graham applies to all juvenile nonhomicide offenders regardless of number/severity of nonhomicide crimes | State argued severity/multiplicity could justify deference to consecutive lengthy sentences | Held for Budder — Graham draws only one categorical line (homicide vs nonhomicide); severity or multiplicity of nonhomicide offenses does not remove case from Graham’s scope |
| Scope of AEDPA review: whether deference permits upholding OCCA decision | Budder argued OCCA was contrary to clear Supreme Court holdings and federal habeas relief is warranted under § 2254(d)(1) | Oklahoma argued AEDPA deference and possible distinctions warranted affirmance | Held for Budder — under § 2254(d)(1) the OCCA’s ruling was contrary to clearly established Supreme Court law (Graham) and relief was proper |
| Remedy following contrary state-court ruling under AEDPA | Budder sought vacatur and resentencing to allow a meaningful opportunity for release | State opposed relief or contended remand for limited relief only | Held for Budder — reversed and remanded with instruction to grant habeas, vacate sentence, and resentence within a reasonable time |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (Eighth Amendment bars life-without-parole for juvenile nonhomicide offenders; if life imposed, must provide a realistic opportunity for release)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (juvenile sentencing requires consideration of youth; informed later characterization of Graham as categorical)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) (held Miller retroactive and described Graham as categorical precedent regarding juveniles)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) (juveniles have diminished culpability; informs Graham’s youth-based analysis)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (explains AEDPA deference and standards for federal habeas review)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000) (frames AEDPA § 2254(d)(1) "contrary to" and "unreasonable application" standards)
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991) (Eighth Amendment proportionality principle; referenced for severity of LWOP)