Opinion ID: 753758
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Disproportionate Sentencing Claim

Text: 18 Lastly, French claims that his sentence was disproportionate to that of his codefendant. French received a 50 to 100 year sentence, while his codefendant received a 15 to 20 year sentence. The district court dismissed French's disparate sentencing claim because he defaulted on the claim in the Illinois courts by failing to raise the issue on direct review of his conviction. See French, 947 F.Supp. at 1198-99. Under Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991): 19 in all cases in which a state prisoner has defaulted his federal claims in state court pursuant to an independent and adequate state procedural rule, federal habeas review of the claims is barred unless the prisoner can demonstrate cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law, or demonstrate that failure to consider the claims will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice. 20 French has shown no cause for the failure to raise the issue on direct review, and because French did not show that the sentence was clearly based on an inappropriate factor, there is no fundamental miscarriage of justice in allowing his sentence to stand. Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court. AFFIRMED