State v. Thieszen, 300 Neb. 112

In 1987, 14-year-old Sydney L. Thieszen shot and killed his 12-year-old sister. He pled guilty to second-degree murder in 1988 and received life imprisonment plus a consecutive 80–240 month firearm term; after postconviction proceedings and retrial he again received life plus the firearm term.
After Miller v. Alabama, Thieszen obtained postconviction relief and was remanded for resentencing under the juvenile-offender considerations of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-105.02.
A 2017 mitigation hearing produced extensive evidence: Thieszen’s severely abusive early childhood, multiple foster placements, diagnoses of conduct disorder and later adjustment disorder, expert testimony about adolescent brain development and impulsivity, and evidence of rehabilitation and good conduct in prison over decades.
Psychologists testified Thieszen was immature and impulsive at the time of the offense but currently low risk for future violence and showing remorse and prosocial adjustment.
At resentencing the district court considered statutory juvenile mitigating factors and sentenced Thieszen to 70 years to life for first-degree murder, consecutive to his existing 80–240 month firearm sentence. Thieszen appealed.

Issue	Thieszen's Argument	State's/Respondent's Argument	Held
Court refused to strike letters in presentence report	Letters included anonymous, baseless, or intimidating material; should be stricken	Court may consider relevant material and assigned weight; it struck unsigned letters and would disregard unsupported portions	No abuse of discretion; court acted within broad sentencing-evidence latitude
Victim-impact testimony by defendant’s sister	Sister not a statutory “victim” (nearest surviving relative); testimony improper	Statute grants baseline rights but does not limit court’s discretion to hear relevant family impact evidence; parents declined to participate	No abuse; court properly allowed sister to read letter as immediate family member
Sentence excessive / de facto life without parole	70-to-life is excessive given age at offense and mitigation; effectively precludes meaningful release	Sentence within statutory range; court considered juvenile factors and mental-health evaluations; lengthy term still allows realistic chance of parole	No abuse of discretion; sentence affirmed as within limits and considering mitigating factors
Disproportionality / comparison to other juvenile cases	Sentence disproportionate compared to other juvenile resentencings (e.g., Jackson)	Sentences are case-specific; differences in facts and culpability justify variance; appellate court should not "color match"	No proportionality violation; court properly weighed circumstances and individualized factors

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (mandatory life-without-parole for juveniles unconstitutional)
State v. Thieszen, 232 Neb. 952 (1989) (direct appeal recounting original proceedings)
State v. Thieszen, 295 Neb. 293 (2016) (Nebraska Supreme Court decision remanding for resentencing post-Miller)
State v. Jackson, 297 Neb. 22 (2017) (discussion of juvenile resentencing and comparative terms)
State v. Russell, 299 Neb. 483 (2018) (standards on appellate review of sentencing)
State v. Galindo, 278 Neb. 599 (2009) (sentencing court discretion to consider family impact evidence beyond statutory baseline)
State v. Casares, 291 Neb. 150 (2015) (broad discretion in sources and types of sentencing evidence)
State v. Smith, 295 Neb. 957 (2017) (lengthy term-of-years can still provide meaningful opportunity for release)
State v. Castaneda, 295 Neb. 547 (2017) (appropriateness of sentence includes court’s observations and full record)