State v. Jones
297 Neb. 557
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Jones, 16 at offense, pled no contest to first-degree murder; sentenced to life imprisonment in 1999.
- Miller v. Alabama held mandatory life without parole for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment; requires individualized consideration.
- Nebraska amended §28-105.02 to require mitigating factors for juveniles convicted of Class IA felonies.
- Jones’ sentence was vacated and he was resentenced to 80 years to life in 2016 after mitigation hearing.
- Court considered age, history, and mitigating evidence to determine appropriate sentence under §28-105.02(2).
- Jones appeals arguing de facto life sentence, lack of specific age-related findings, and disproportionality; court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 80-to-life sentence is de facto life without parole. | Jones argues it amounts to LWOP. | State contends not a de facto LWOP; parity with mitigation factors. | No de facto LWOP; parole eligibility at 56 satisfied. |
| Whether the court made required age-related findings. | Jones contends lack of explicit irreparable corruption finding. | State asserts no formal finding required when parole is possible. | Courts need not make explicit irreparable corruption findings where parole is possible. |
| Whether the sentence is constitutionally proportional under the Eighth Amendment. | Jones seeks proportionality due to youth and reform. | State cites Mantich and Montgomery allowing proportionality within narrow bounds. | Sentence not disproportionate given offense and offender; not grossly disproportionate. |
| Whether the district court properly considered age-related characteristics under 28-105.02. | Jones argues due process requires explicit age-related analysis. | State asserts court considered statutory factors and evidence. | Due process satisfied; statutory factors and mitigation evidence considered. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory life without parole for juveniles unconstitutional; requires individualized consideration)
- Mantich, 287 Neb. 320 (Neb. 2014) (retroactive Miller application to collateral review; dictates resentencing when appropriate)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (S. Ct. 2016) (retroactivity; youth-focused sentencing considerations)
- Garza, 295 Neb. 434 (Neb. 2016) (no strict requirement for age-related factual findings when LWOP is not imposed)
- Smith, 295 Neb. 957 (Neb. 2017) (meaningful opportunity to obtain release; life expectancy not sole factor; parole can provide release potential)
- Nollen, 296 Neb. 94 (Neb. 2017) (applies Miller/Montgomery framework to age-related considerations)