State v. Garza, 295 Neb. 434

Background

In 1991, Christopher M. Garza (age 16 at the time) was convicted of first‑degree (felony) murder and use of a firearm; he received life imprisonment for murder and a consecutive 6 2/3–20 year term for the weapon count.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s Miller v. Alabama decision prompted resentencing for juveniles; Garza obtained postconviction relief and was resentenced in 2015.
At resentencing the district court considered a presentence report, trial materials, victim impact, Garza’s in‑prison programming and conduct (including 182 misconduct reports, decreasing over time), certificates, and psychological evidence about adolescent development.
The court acknowledged Garza’s rehabilitation efforts and remorse but emphasized the planning, prolonged sexual assault and violent injuries inflicted, and efforts to conceal the crime.
The court imposed 90 to 90 years’ imprisonment on the murder conviction (consecutive to the earlier weapon sentence), making Garza parole‑eligible after about 48 years; Garza appealed, arguing the sentence was excessive and a de facto life term contrary to Eighth Amendment and Miller principles.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Garza)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the 90‑to‑90‑year term is a prohibited de facto life sentence for a juvenile	The sentence functions as life imprisonment (Garza will spend most of his life incarcerated), contrary to Miller and the notion that life without parole should be "uncommon"	Miller does not categorically bar life terms for juveniles; resentencing complied with Miller and Nebraska law permitting lengthy terms within statutory limits	Court: Characterization as "de facto life" is immaterial; Miller governs homicide sentences and does not categorically forbid life or long terms if individualized consideration occurs; upheld sentence
Whether the sentencing court was required to make an explicit finding of "irreparable corruption" before imposing the term	Garza contends the court had to find he was among the "rare juvenile offender whose crime reflects irreparable corruption" before imposing such a lengthy term	State: That specific finding is required only when imposing life without parole; Garza was resentenced to a term of years with parole eligibility and Miller’s requirements were satisfied	Court: No specific "irreparable corruption" finding required here; Miller/Tatum language applies to life without parole cases—Garza received a term of years and the court properly considered required factors
Whether the district court considered required juvenile‑sentencing factors and mitigating evidence	Garza argues the court did not sufficiently weigh youth/mitigating factors and his rehabilitation records	State: The court reviewed statutory mitigating factors, Miller considerations, presentence report, trial record, and evidence of rehabilitation; emphasized nature and violence of offense	Court: Record shows the court considered § 28‑105.02 factors and Miller; no abuse of discretion
Whether the sentence was excessive (abuse of discretion)	Garza claims the sentence is excessive given his age, rehabilitation, and mitigating evidence	State contends the sentence is within statutory limits and warranted by the planning, brutality, duration of injuries, and concealment efforts	Court: Sentence is within statutory range, supported by record, and not an abuse of discretion — affirmed

Key Cases Cited

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (mandatory life without parole for juveniles convicted of homicide violates the Eighth Amendment)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) (Miller’s rule applies retroactively; life without parole excessive for all but rare juveniles whose crimes reflect irreparable corruption)
Tatum v. Arizona, 137 S. Ct. 11 (2016) (remanded juvenile life sentences for reconsideration under Miller/Montgomery)
Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (categorical bar on life without parole for nonhomicide juvenile offenses)
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) (categorical bar on death penalty for juveniles)
State v. Mantich, 287 Neb. 320 (Neb. 2014) (held Miller applies retroactively in Nebraska and guided juvenile homicide resentencings)
State v. Garza, 241 Neb. 934 (Neb. 1992) (original appeal recounting facts and affirming convictions)