527 P.3d 322
Ariz.2023Background
- In 1995 Beau John Greene beat and killed Roy Johnson, then stole his car and used his credit cards; a jury convicted Greene of first‑degree murder and other offenses and the trial court imposed death based on two aggravators including pecuniary gain (former § 13‑751(F)(5)).
- On direct appeal this Court affirmed the murder conviction and the (F)(5) pecuniary‑gain aggravator but reversed an (F)(6) heinousness finding; Greene was sentenced to death in 1996 and his first PCR petition (filed 2000) was denied.
- In 2019 the Arizona Legislature narrowed the pecuniary‑gain aggravator, combining it with procurement‑by‑payment and limiting pecuniary motive to murder‑for‑hire situations; several other aggravators were repealed or renumbered.
- The 2019 statute contains no express retroactivity clause; the State contended the amendments are prospective only.
- Greene filed a successive PCR in 2020 arguing the 2019 amendments rendered his 1996 death sentence unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment and art. II, § 15 (Arizona), and sought relief under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(a), (c), (g), and (h); the superior court granted relief and vacated his death sentence.
- The Arizona Supreme Court reversed: it held the amendments are not retroactive, Greene remains eligible under other aggravators (notably (F)(2) for contemporaneous robbery), and his sentence is not unconstitutional under federal or state standards; thus no Rule 32 relief was warranted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Greene) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retroactivity of 2019 amendments to § 13‑751(F)(5) | Amendments reflect legislative judgment narrowing capital eligibility and should apply to prior sentences making Greene ineligible for death | Amendments lack an express retroactivity clause and so apply prospectively only | Amendments are not retroactive; superior court erred |
| Eighth Amendment / "evolving standards of decency" | Repeal/narrowing of (F)(5) shows societal consensus that Greene’s conduct no longer warrants death; executing him would be disproportionate | Legislature did not abolish capital punishment for Greene’s conduct; other aggravators (e.g., (F)(2)) still permit death; no national consensus shown | No consensus; on independent judgment sentence is proportionate; Eighth Amendment not violated |
| State constitutional claim (art. II, § 15) | Arizona should follow federal Eighth Amendment framework and find sentence unconstitutional | Arizona law does not compel a different result; prior decisions and present analysis support constitutional sentence | Court would reach same conclusion under state constitution; no violation |
| Availability of relief under Rule 32.1(a), (c), (g), (h) | 2019 change is a substantive legal change entitling Greene to collateral relief under these subsections (including that sentence is now "not authorized by law") | Because amendments are prospective and the sentence was lawful when imposed, none of the listed Rule 32 grounds provide relief | Relief denied under each provision: (a)/(c) inapplicable because sentence was lawful when imposed; (g) fails because change not retroactive; (h) fails for lack of clear and convincing evidence about aggravator facts |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Greene, 192 Ariz. 431 (1998) (direct appeal affirming convictions and pecuniary‑gain aggravator)
- State v. Rutledge, 205 Ariz. 7 (2003) (discussed contemporaneous serious‑offense aggravator and prompted legislative amendment)
- State v. Ewer, 523 P.3d 393 (Ariz. 2023) (statutory interpretation principle: read text in context)
- Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982) (Eighth Amendment analysis using legislative, jury, prosecutorial, historical data to assess consensus)
- Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) (use of legislative and jury behavior to assess evolving standards)
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) (finding a national consensus relevant to Eighth Amendment proportionality)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) (juvenile death penalty and assessment of state practice and international opinion)
- Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008) (Eighth Amendment independent judgment and consensus approach)
- Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976) (framework for capital sentencing and proportionality review)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016) (Eighth Amendment proportionality and protection against disproportionate punishment)