Gillette v. Cain

A waiver hearing transferring a juvenile into adult court is not sufficient consideration of an offender’s youth to constitutionally impose a mandatory sentence of life without parole; the sentencer must consider the offender’s youth. Miller v. Alabama, 567 US 460, 486-89, 132 S Ct 2455, 183 L Ed 2d 407 (2012); State v. Link, 297 Or App 126, 155, 441 P3d 664, rev allowed, 365 Or 556 (2019).

Petitioner was convicted as an adult of an aggravated murder he committed at age seventeen.  The mandatory sentence was life in prison with the possibility of conversion to life with parole possible.  Petitioner appealed the post-conviction court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Superintendent.  On appeal, Petitioner argued that, due to the lack of consideration of his age at sentencing, the imposition of one of the state’s most severe penalties was unconstitutional.  In response, the Superintendent argued that Petitioner’s youth was sufficiently considered during the juvenile court hearing which waived jurisdiction and passed Petitioner into adult court.  A waiver hearing transferring a juvenile into adult court is not sufficient consideration of an offender’s youth to constitutionally impose a mandatory sentence of life without parole; the sentencer must consider the offender’s youth.  Miller v. Alabama, 567 US 460, 486-89, 132 S Ct 2455, 183 L Ed 2d 407 (2012); State v. Link, 297 Or App 126, 155, 441 P3d 664, rev allowed, 365 Or 556 (2019).  The Court held that the “process of waiving Petitioner to adult court was” not a substitute for the requirement that a sentencer consider the Petitioner’s youth prior to the imposition of a life sentence.  Thus, the Court held that Petitioner’s sentence was unconstitutional, and he was entitled to post-conviction relief.  Reversed and remanded.