People v. Johnson
2013 IL App (5th) 110112
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Corey Johnson was 16 when he committed murders in 1999 and was tried as an adult for first-degree murder.
- The State alleged Johnson shot Evans and Scott during an attempted carjacking; Johnson claimed self-defense or defense of himself during a drug transaction gone wrong.
- Johnson was sentenced in 2003 to a mandatory term of natural life imprisonment without parole under 730 ILCS 5/5-8-1(a)(1)(c)(ii).
- Postconviction proceedings began with a 2010 pro se petition; the circuit court dismissed the petition in 2011 based on waiver, forfeiture, res judicata, and lack of merit.
- On appeal, Johnson challenged Miller v. Alabama retroactivity, the automatic transfer statute, and the mandatory-life sentence for a juvenile, among other issues; the court granted relief on the Miller-based sentence issue and remanded for a new sentencing hearing.
- The appellate court affirmed the denial of most postconviction claims but vacated Johnson’s sentence, remanding for a new sentencing hearing considering Miller principles.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retroactivity of Miller to Johnson's case | Johnson: Miller applies retroactively to bar mandatory life. | State: Miller is not retroactive or applicable to Johnson's case. | Miller retroactive; applies to Johnson; sentence vacated. |
| Constitutionality of mandatory natural life for a juvenile | Johnson: mandatory life without parole violates Eighth Amendment and rehabilitative principles. | State/Johnson's position: not explicitly stated; argument focused on constitutionality under Miller. | Mandatory life sentence for a juvenile violates the Eighth Amendment as applied; remand for re-sentencing. |
| Automatic transfer statute challenges | Johnson contends automatic transfer procedures violate due process and related rights. | State maintains these issues were not properly raised or are unpersuasive. | Issues deemed not controlling; court rejects substantial due process concerns for automatic transfer in light of Johnson’s Miller relief. |
| Waiver/Res judicata and procedural defenses | Johnson argues claims were improperly dismissed; seeks relief on merits. | State asserts waiver, forfeiture, and res judicata bar relief. | Claims denied on waiver/forfeiture grounds where applicable; however, Miller-based sentencing relief granted. |
| Adequacy of postconviction proceedings and related substantiating arguments | Johnson asserts ineffective assistance and due process concerns throughout postconviction process. | State argues arguments are insufficiently developed and not properly preserved. | Postconviction claims largely rejected; Miller relief dominates the disposition. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory life without parole for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment; retroactivity considerations discussed)
- Morfin, 981 N.E.2d 1010 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2012) (supports retroactive application of Miller and sentencing considerations for juveniles)
- People v. Williams, 982 N.E.2d 181 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2012) (Miller retroactivity and watershed rule discussion)
- People v. Whitfield, 840 N.E.2d 658 (Ill. 2005) (postconviction standards and waiver principles)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (U.S. 1989) (Teague retroactivity framework for new constitutional rules on collateral review)
- People v. Sanders, 939 N.E.2d 352 (Ill. 2010) (Teague-based retroactivity discussion in Illinois)