State v. Steele, 915 N.W.2d 560

On April 18, 2016, two armed intruders entered a Lincoln residence, shot and killed Christopher Coleman, shot and permanently paralyzed Jerry Griffis, and killed the household dog; three small children were present.
Markel D. Steele (age 17 at the time) was identified through Facebook, footprint and shoe pattern evidence, and admissions to jail informants; a co-defendant and witness placed Steele with a .45-caliber handgun at the scene.
Steele pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement: second degree murder and first degree assault (other counts dismissed).
At sentencing the district court considered Steele’s youth, mental health evaluation, family and social background, and numerous mitigating factors but emphasized the planning, depravity, violence, and danger to the public.
The court imposed consecutive terms: 60 years to life for second degree murder and 40–50 years for first degree assault, with parole eligibility in 50 years (Steele would be ~67).
Steele appealed, arguing (1) his sentence is an unconstitutional "de facto life" sentence under Miller/Graham and (2) the sentences are excessive/an abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Steele’s aggregate sentence is an unconstitutional de facto life sentence under Miller/Graham	Steele: Term-of-years that makes him eligible for parole only at ~67 is a de facto life sentence and unlawful absent a finding of "irreparable corruption"	State: Sentence allows a "meaningful and realistic opportunity to obtain release" and is not life without parole; Miller does not require an "irreparably corrupt" finding here	Court: Not a de facto life sentence; parole eligibility at 67 gives a meaningful opportunity for release; no Miller violation
Whether the district court abused its discretion by imposing excessive sentences	Steele: Court failed to properly apply mitigating factors and relied on improper considerations/bias	State: Court expressly considered youth, Miller/Graham factors, mental health evaluation, offense gravity, and public safety; sentencing within statutory limits	Court: No abuse of discretion; court appropriately considered relevant factors and did not rely on identified improper bases

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (mandatory life without parole for juveniles violates the Eighth Amendment; individualized sentencing required)
Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (juveniles may not be sentenced to life without parole for nonhomicide offenses; Eighth Amendment limits)
State v. Russell, 299 Neb. 483 (2018) (term-of-years sentence that affords a meaningful and realistic opportunity for release is not a de facto life sentence under Miller)
State v. Smith, 295 Neb. 957 (2017) (discussion of juvenile sentencing principles under Miller and Graham)
State v. Pattno, 254 Neb. 733 (1998) (vacating a sentence where the judge relied on personal religious beliefs in sentencing)
State v. Bruna, 12 Neb. App. 798 (2004) (vacating sentence where judicial reliance on personal religious views was found)