State v. Borlase, 33A24

Tristan Borlase, age 17 years and 11 months, killed both his parents in April 2019 after conflicts regarding his academic struggles and disciplinary actions by his parents.
Borlase was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder in North Carolina and sentenced to two consecutive life sentences without parole under the state’s Miller-fix statute, which governs juvenile sentencing post-Miller v. Alabama.
At sentencing, the trial court considered statutory mitigating factors—including age, immaturity, intellectual capacity, mental health, familial pressure—but found most did not mitigate due to Borlase’s high intellect, lack of specific immaturity, and absence of family dysfunction as defined by the court.
On appeal, Borlase argued the sentence violated the Eighth Amendment as interpreted in Miller v. Alabama and related North Carolina law, contending insufficient consideration of mitigating evidence and improper findings regarding irreparable corruption or incorrigibility.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the sentence, applying an abuse of discretion standard and holding there was no error in the sentencing process; the Supreme Court of North Carolina reviewed the appeal, including a detailed dissent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the sentencing court properly applied Miller factors	Borlase: Court failed to consider credible mitigating evidence	State: All factors considered, weight is discretionary	Court affirmed: Sentencing court considered required factors; discretion upheld
Whether a finding of permanent incorrigibility is necessary	Borlase: Must find permanent incorrigibility before LWOP imposed	State: Not required by Supreme Court precedent	Court: No explicit finding required; process, not result, is key under Miller/Jones
Standard of review for appellate courts in Miller sentencing	Borlase: Rigorous review required for uncontradicted statutory factors	State: Abuse of discretion is proper standard	Court: Abuse of discretion is correct; appellate courts do not reweigh evidence
Whether familial/peer pressure factor required mitigation	Borlase: Uncontradicted evidence of family conflict was ignored	State: Court found no significant mitigating family pressure	Court: No error; court not required to find mitigation unless evidence compels it

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (Eighth Amendment forbids mandatory LWOP for juveniles; must consider youth as mitigating)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016) (Miller is substantive; LWOP for juveniles only for the rarest cases of permanent incorrigibility)
Jones v. Mississippi, 141 S. Ct. 1307 (2021) (No explicit factual finding of incorrigibility required; sentencing process must allow consideration of youth)
State v. James, 371 N.C. 77 (2018) (North Carolina's Miller-fix statute aligns with Eighth Amendment requirements)