State v. Castaneda

Juvenile Law Center filed an amicus brief in support of the appellate brief filed by the Douglas County (Omaha) Public Defender Thomas C. Riley, on behalf of Castaneda, who was convicted of first degree (felony) murder for a crime he committed at age 15 and received a mandatory life without parole sentence.

Under Nebraska law, any juvenile convicted of first degree murder—including felony murder—must be sentenced to life without parole. Our brief argued that Nebraska’s mandatory statutory sentencing scheme is now unconstitutional pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Miller v. Alabama, which banned mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles. The brief also argued that pursuant to both Miller and Graham, life without parole is not a constitutional sentencing option for juveniles convicted of felony murder because, by definition, a juvenile convicted of felony murder—which requires no finding that the juvenile killed or intended to kill—cannot be classified as among most serious juvenile offenders deserving of the most severe penalty.

The brief further argued that the possibility of commutation of the life imprisonment sentence does not alter the unconstitutionality of the punishment, as it neither allows the court to impose an individualized sentence (as required by Miller), nor does it provide a meaningful opportunity for release (as required by Graham). Pursuant to these facts, our brief argued that Castaneda’s sentence must be vacated and a new constitutional sentence imposed.

The Nebraska Supreme Court held that “the life imprisonment sentences imposed upon Castaneda were effectively life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and unconstitutional under Miller.” The Court vacated those sentences and remanded the case for resentencing.