422 P.3d 741
Okla. Crim. App.2018Background
- Robert A. Stevens (born 1976) committed multiple crimes on March 8, 1994, including first‑degree murder; he was 17 at the time.
- In 1996 Stevens entered a negotiated plea: guilty to murder (CF‑1994‑90) and no contest to related charges; sentenced to life without parole (LWOP).
- Stevens’ convictions and sentence became final in 1996; he filed a second post‑conviction application in 2017 invoking Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana.
- The district court summarily denied relief, reasoning Stevens’ negotiated plea prevented Miller/Montgomery from applying.
- Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals reversed: plea and conviction remain valid, but LWOP for a juvenile requires an individualized sentencing determination under Miller/Montgomery; Stevens’ LWOP vacated and case remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Stevens) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Miller/Montgomery apply to a juvenile LWOP imposed after a guilty plea | Miller/Montgomery render juvenile LWOP unconstitutional absent individualized sentencing; Stevens was 17 and lacked such a hearing | Plea forecloses collateral attack on sentence; plea preserved sentence validity | Miller/Montgomery apply to Stevens’ sentence despite plea; plea does not cure an unconstitutional sentence |
| Retroactivity — can Miller be raised on collateral review of final sentences? | Miller announced a substantive rule given retroactive effect by Montgomery; Stevens’ successive petition is timely | Argues plea and finality bar relief | Court accepts retroactivity; successive petition permitted under §1086 due to intervening change in law |
| Waiver by guilty plea of right to individualized Miller hearing | Stevens could not knowingly waive a right not yet recognized; plea does not waive later‑recognized constitutional sentencing protections | State contends plea waived challenge because court had power to convict and sentence | Court: plea does not waive Miller protections; a sentence void under Miller cannot be preserved by plea |
| Appropriate remedy / procedure on remand | Stevens seeks relief consistent with Miller (resentencing or modification) | State may offer modification to life with parole or proceed to resentencing | LWOP vacated; remanded for resentencing or State may agree to modify to life with parole; new individualized sentencing hearing required if State seeks LWOP |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (Eighth Amendment forbids mandatory LWOP for offenders under 18; individualized sentencing required)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) (Miller announced a substantive rule with retroactive effect)
- Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970) (subsequent judicial decisions do not necessarily invalidate the truth or reliability of a guilty plea)
- Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) (facts increasing penalty beyond the statutory maximum must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (same principle that increases in punishment must be found by jury)
- Luna v. State, 387 P.3d 956 (Okla. Crim. App. 2016) (Oklahoma application of Miller/Montgomery; requires individualized sentencing consideration for juvenile LWOP)