Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2014

State v. Montgomery

Supreme Court of Louisiana · Decided June 20, 2014 · Grant, Johnson, Reasons, Writ

141 So. 3d 264; 2014 WL 2818390; 2014 La. LEXIS 1538 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

LaMonte Rydell Martin v. State of Minnesota (Minn. 2015)
Beach v. State (Mont. 2015)
State v. Lewis (La. Ct. App. 2018)
State v. Sumler (La. Ct. App. 2017)
Com. v. Shamsiddeen, O. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016)
In re Willover (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)
In re Willover (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)
In re Willover (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)
Com. v. Davis, D. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

In re Montgomery, Henry; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Curt Div. G, No. 48-489; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2013 KW 0442.

| iDenied. The district court did not err in denying relator’s Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence. See State v. Tate, 12-2763 (La.11/5/13), 130 So.3d 829, cert. denied, Tate v. Louisiana, No. 13-8915, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 2663, 189 L.Ed.2d 214, 2014 WL 834279 (May 27, 2014).

JOHNSON, C.J., dissents and would grant the writ and assigns reasons.

Dissenting Opinion

JOHNSON, C.J.

dissents and would grant the writ.

|J respectfully dissent. On June 25, 2012, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Miller v. Alabama, which held “that the Eighth Amendment *265forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile offenders.” Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012). In State v. Tate, 2012-2763 (La.11/5/13), 130 So.3d 829, this court held that Miller does not retroactively apply to juvenile offenders whose life sentences were handed down before the Supreme Court issued its opinion. I dissented from this court’s ruling in Tate, finding that Miller announced a new rule of criminal procedure that is substantive and consequently should apply retroactively. For the same reasons expressed in my dissent in Tate, I must dissent in this case.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.