527 S.W.3d 55
Mo.2017Background
- In 1983 Jason Carr, age 16, was convicted of three counts of capital murder for killing his brother, stepmother, and stepsister and was sentenced to three concurrent terms of life imprisonment without parole eligibility for 50 years.
- The State did not seek the death penalty, so the statutory alternative was life without parole for 50 years; no presentence mitigation hearing occurred because no lesser sentence was available under the statute.
- Carr filed a habeas petition after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. Alabama (2012), arguing his mandatory life-without-parole sentences for crimes committed as a juvenile violated the Eighth Amendment.
- The Missouri Supreme Court applied Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016) to permit retroactive collateral review of Miller’s rule and set the case for briefing and argument.
- The Court concluded the mandatory sentencing scheme precluded consideration of Carr’s youth and attendant circumstances, so his sentences violated the Eighth Amendment and he must be resentenced under the procedure articulated in State v. Hart.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandatory life-without-parole-for-50-years imposed on a 16-year-old violates the Eighth Amendment under Miller | Carr: mandatory scheme prevented any consideration of youth, maturity, and mitigating circumstances, so sentence is disproportionate | State: Miller applies only to schemes mandating life without parole (absolute LWOP); concurrent LWOP-for-50-years does not trigger Miller | Held: Violates Eighth Amendment because statutory scheme precluded sentencer from considering youth; resentencing required |
| Whether Miller’s substantive rule applies retroactively on collateral review | Carr: Miller announced a substantive rule forbidding certain punishments for juveniles and is retroactive | State: (implicit) retroactivity contested but Montgomery governs | Held: Montgomery makes Miller retroactive; habeas review permitted |
| Remedy and procedure if Miller applies | Carr: requires resentencing with opportunity for sentencer to consider Miller factors; if sentencer rejects LWOP-50, conviction reduced as in Hart | State: (implicit) alternative sentencing or preservation of original verdict argued by dissent | Held: Follow Hart: sentencer must consider youth; if not persuaded LWOP-50 is appropriate, statute void as-applied, verdict vacated to second-degree murder and resentencing under that range |
| Applicability of precedent (Hart and related cases) | Carr: Miller and Hart support relief where mandatory scheme precludes youth consideration | State/Dissent: Miller/Hart limited to absolute LWOP; concurrent LWOP-for-50-years differs and should survive | Held: Majority applies Miller/Hart principles to Carr’s sentences despite dissent’s narrower reading |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (juveniles cannot receive mandatory life without parole; sentencer must consider youth and attendant circumstances)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (Miller’s substantive rule is retroactive on collateral review)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (death penalty unconstitutional for crimes committed under age 18)
- State v. Hart, 404 S.W.3d 232 (Mo. banc 2013) (procedure for resentencing juveniles after Miller)
- State v. Carr, 687 S.W.2d 606 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985) (trial facts and direct-appeal history)