« Highlighting that mass incarceration is "Not Just the Drug War" | Main | Examining some statistical realities behind federal death penalty administration »

March 6, 2015

Fourth Circuit holds that Miller is not retroactive on collateral review under Teague

Like many who follow Eighth Amendment jurisprudence or care about juvenile justice, I had been hopeful that the Supreme Court was finally going to resolve this Term whether its Miller ruling barring mandatory LWOP sentences for juvenile offenders was to be applied retroactively.  But Toca, the case on which cert had been granted a few months ago, got resolved on other grounds and now lower court rulings continue to be central to this issue for the time being.  Consequently, I am grateful to a reader who alerted me that the Fourth Circuit yesterday, in Johnson v. Ponton, No. 13-7824 (4th Cir. March 5, 2015) (available here), formally addressed this matter.  Here is how the panel's unanimous opinion starts and winds down: 

Petitioner-Appellant Shermaine Ali Johnson appeals the district court’s dismissal of his habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his sentence of life imprisonment without parole.  He argues that the rule announced in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012), is retroactively applicable to him on collateral review.  Miller held that imposing mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders -- i.e., imposing that sentence without any individualized consideration of their status as juveniles -- violates the Eighth Amendment.  For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the Miller rule is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review. We therefore affirm....

We therefore hold that the Supreme Court has not held the Miller rule retroactively applicable, and that the Court’s holdings do not dictate retroactivity because the rule is neither substantive nor a watershed rule of criminal procedure.  In so deciding, we join the Eleventh Circuit.  We also note that our holding is consistent with that of the only other circuit court panel to have answered the question of Miller’s retroactivity.  See Craig v. Cain, No. 12-30035, 2013 WL 69128 (5th Cir. Jan. 4, 2013) (per curiam) (unpublished).

March 6, 2015 at 10:40 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e201b8d0e44d63970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fourth Circuit holds that Miller is not retroactive on collateral review under Teague:

Comments

so we have now identified another federal appeals court that pulls legal opinions out of their asses. Sorry if the USSC says it's unconstitutional sorry you fuckups but it's ALWAYS unconstitutional past - present and future. Unless there is a constitutional amendment.

Posted by: rodsmith | Mar 7, 2015 2:22:05 AM

That was not a good panel for the juvenile. I wonder if they will seek en banc review. The ideological balance on the 4th has moved a lot in the last decade.

Posted by: anon | Mar 9, 2015 4:10:05 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB