12 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2024 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wyatt L. Bear Cloudgreen2 sentences2021Miller makes clear that a juvenile may not be sentenced to a mandatory, unsurvivable prison term without first considering in mitigation his youth, immaturity, and potential for rehabilitation.”); see also Bear Cloud v. State, 2014 WY 113, ¶ 33 , 334 P.3d 132 (Wyo. 2014) (“[T]he teachings of the Roper/Graham/Miller trilogy require sentencing courts to provide an individualized sentencing hearing to weigh the factors for determining a juvenile’s ‘diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform’ when, as here, the aggregate sentences result in the functional equivalent of life without pa 2021Miller makes clear that a juvenile may not be sentenced to a mandatory, unsurvivable prison term without first considering in mitigation his youth, immaturity, and potential for rehabilitation.”); see also Bear Cloud v. State, 2014 WY 113, ¶ 33 , 334 P.3d 132 (Wyo. 2014) (“[T]he teachings of the Roper/Graham/Miller trilogy require sentencing courts to provide an individualized sentencing hearing to weigh the factors for determining a juvenile’s ‘diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform’ when, as here, the aggregate sentences result in the functional equivalent of life without pa | 2 | 6 |
People v. Kolzowgreen1 sentence2024“The fact that a sentencing judge added some personal observations, while not to be encouraged, does not amount to an abuse of discretion.” People v. Kolzow, 301 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Damerongreen1 sentence2024Relying on People v. Dameron, 196 Ill. 2d 156, 171 (2001), defendant argues these statements brought in the trial court’s independent research and private knowledge, which violated her right to an individualized sentencing hearing. - 15 - ¶ 40 We are not persuaded the trial court relied on any improper information to enhance defendant’s sentence. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Reyes
green
2 sentences2017Miller makes clear that a juvenile may not be sentenced to a mandatory, unsurvivable prison term without first considering in mitigation his youth, immaturity, and potential for rehabilitation.” Reyes, 2016 IL 119271, ¶ 9 . ¶ 55 In addition our supreme court held: “ ‘[T]he teachings of the Roper/Graham/Miller trilogy require sentencing courts to provide an individualized sentencing hearing to weigh the factors for determining a juvenile’s “diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform” when, as here, the aggregate sentences result in the functional equivalent of life without parole. 2017Miller makes clear that a juvenile may not be sentenced to a mandatory, unsurvivable prison term without first considering in mitigation his youth, immaturity, and potential for rehabilitation.” Reyes, 2016 IL 119271, ¶ 9 . ¶ 55 In addition our supreme court held: “ ‘[T]he teachings of the Roper/Graham/Miller trilogy require sentencing courts to provide an individualized sentencing hearing to weigh the factors for determining a juvenile’s “diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform” when, as here, the aggregate sentences result in the functional equivalent of life without parole. | 3 | 2017–2021 |
People v. Holman
red
2 sentences2018To do otherwise would be to ignore the reality that lengthy aggregate sentences have the effect of mandating that a juvenile "die in prison even if a judge or jury would have thought that his youth and its attendant characteristics, along with the nature of his crime, made a lesser sentence * * * more appropriate." [Citation.] Such a lengthy sentence " 'means denial of hope; it means that good behavior and character improvement are immaterial; it means that whatever the future might hold in store for the mind and spirit of [the juvenile convict], he will remain in prison for the rest of his da 2018To do otherwise would be to ignore the reality that lengthy aggregate sentences have the effect of mandating that a juvenile "die in prison even if a judge or jury would have thought that his youth and its attendant characteristics, along with the nature of his crime, made a lesser sentence * * * more appropriate." [Citation.] Such a lengthy sentence " 'means denial of hope; it means that good behavior and character improvement are immaterial; it means that whatever the future might hold in store for the mind and spirit of [the juvenile convict], he will remain in prison for the rest of his da | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Miller v. Alabama
green
2 sentences2016To do otherwise -3- would be to ignore the reality that lengthy aggregate sentences have the effect of mandating that a juvenile ‘die in prison even if a judge or jury would have thought that his youth and its attendant characteristics, along with the nature of his crime, made a lesser sentence (for example, life with the possibility of parole) more appropriate.’ Miller, 567 U.S. at ___ , 132 S. Ct. at 2460 . 2016To do otherwise would be to ignore the reality that lengthy aggregate sentences have the effect of mandating that a juvenile ‘die in prison even if a judge or jury would have thought that his youth and its attendant characteristics, along with the nature of his crime, made a lesser sentence (for example, life with the possibility of parole) more appropriate.’ Miller, 567 U.S. at ___ , 132 S. Ct. at 2460 . | 2 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Miller
green
1 sentence2021To do otherwise would be to ignore the reality that lengthy aggregate sentences have the effect of mandating that a juvenile die in prison even if a judge or jury would have thought that his youth and its attendant characteristics, along with the nature of his crime, made a lesser sentence *** more appropriate. [Citation.] Such a lengthy sentence means denial of hope; it means that good behavior and character improvement are immaterial; it means that whatever the future might hold in store for the mind and spirit of [the juvenile convict], he will remain in prison for the rest of his days. [Ci | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Mahaffey
green
1 sentence1995(Mahaffey, 128 Ill. 2d at 431 .) Defendant contends that his trial and appellate counsel failed to preserve for direct review his claim that he was denied his constitutional right to an individualized sentencing hearing. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Blystone v. Pennsylvania
green
2 sentences1993(Blystone v. Pennsylvania (1990), 494 U.S. 299, 307 , 108 L. 1993(Blystone v. Pennsylvania (1990), 494 U.S. 299, 307 , 108 L. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Eddings v. Oklahoma
green
1 sentence1993Ed. 2d 1, 8-9 , 102 S. Ct. 869, 874-75 .) This individualized sentencing requirement is satisfied by allowing the sentencer in capital cases to consider all relevant mitigating evidence. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.