People of Michigan v. Montez Stovall

Summary

A parolable life sentence for a juvenile convicted of second-degree murder violates the Michigan Constitution's prohibition on "cruel or unusual punishment" (Const 1963, art 1, § 16), which provides broader protection than the Eighth Amendment. Applying the four-factor test from *People v Bullock*, the Michigan Supreme Court held that such a sentence is disproportionate because it is the most severe penalty for second-degree murder, juveniles receive less process than those convicted of first-degree murder, the national trend disfavors such sentences, and the sentence does not provide a meaningful opportunity for rehabilitation. The court also held that the defendant's successive motion for relief from judgment was not procedurally barred because *Miller* and *Montgomery* served as a retroactive change in law, and that the plea bargain was not illusory.

Holdings

1. The motion is not barred because it is based on a retroactive change in law (Miller and Montgomery) that serves as a foundation for the claim.
2. The plea was not illusory because defendant received the benefit of avoiding a possible life-without-parole sentence for first-degree murder and became eligible for parole.
3. Such a sentence violates Const 1963, art 1, § 16.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the defendant's parolable life sentences for second-degree murder were the result of an illusory plea bargain.
2. Whether the defendant's sentences violate the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment or the Michigan Constitution.

Disposition

vacated