People v. Colasurdo, 2020 IL App (3d) 190356

Background

In 1990 defendant John Colasurdo, age 14, stabbed and killed Helen Correll; no statute of limitations for first‑degree murder. Fourteen years later the State filed a delinquency petition and then prosecuted him in criminal court after transfer proceedings; he was 29 when charged.
After a jury trial defendant was convicted of first‑degree murder; the sentencing order imposed natural life imprisonment without the included full sentencing transcript in the record.
Defendant filed a first postconviction petition (denied at stage one) and then a successive petition raising a Miller challenge (that the court failed to consider youth-related factors).
The circuit court denied leave to file the successive petition but this court remanded; counsel was appointed and defendant later proceeded pro se and amended his petition to add a jurisdiction/voidness claim and a Miller claim.
The circuit court dismissed the amended successive petition at the second stage; this appeal followed. The appellate court affirmed the denial of the jurisdiction/voidness challenge but reversed the dismissal as to the Miller claim and remanded for further proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (People)	Defendant's Argument (Colasurdo)	Held
Whether criminal court lacked jurisdiction to try an adult for an offense committed at age 14	Criminal court had jurisdiction; Fiveash controls; indictment independently commenced criminal proceedings	Juvenile offense cannot be tried in criminal court once defendant is an adult; transfers and prosecution were void	Affirmed for People: criminal court had jurisdiction; juvenile transfer proceedings void but moot because of independent indictment
Whether Miller and progeny require vacatur/remand because sentencing court failed to consider youth-related factors before imposing natural life	Miller applies only to mandatory life and/or de facto life; record is incomplete so relief cannot be granted; claim is forfeited	Miller/Holman/Buffer apply to discretionary natural life; sentencing court did not consider youth/attendant characteristics; entitled to new sentencing hearing	Reversed for defendant: at second stage allegations that the court failed to consider youth must be taken as true; petition advanced for further proceedings (third stage)
Whether defendant forfeited his Miller claim by not raising it earlier (direct appeal)	Claim forfeited; could have been raised earlier	Davis and related precedent supply cause; Miller was not available earlier	Forfeiture rejected—Davis permits Miller claims raised in successive petitions when prior proceedings predated Miller
Whether the incomplete appellate record defeats defendant's Miller claim	Missing sentencing transcripts preclude review and require affirmance	At second stage factual allegations are taken as true; full record not required to advance to third stage	Record insufficiency does not bar advancement at second stage; State could have supplemented record

Key Cases Cited

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (holding mandatory life without parole for juveniles unconstitutional unless youth considered)
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (juvenile death penalty unconstitutional; youth have diminished culpability)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (Miller announced substantive rule to be applied retroactively)
People v. Davis, 2014 IL 115595 (Illinois: Miller creates cause to raise Miller claims in postconviction proceedings)
People v. Holman, 2017 IL 120655 (Illinois: life sentences for juveniles—mandatory or discretionary—require consideration of youth and attendant characteristics)
People v. Buffer, 2019 IL 122327 (Illinois: Miller rationale applies to natural and de facto life sentences; bright‑line de facto life = 40 years)
People v. Fiveash, 2015 IL 117669 (Illinois: criminal court has jurisdiction to try adults for offenses committed as juveniles)
People v. Reyes, 2016 IL 119271 (Illinois: de facto mandatory life sentences require Miller considerations)