Court Opinion

ID: 9808390
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:37:07.703078+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:06.672627
License: Public Domain

LILLEHAUG, Justice
(concurring).
On whether Miller v. Alabama,—U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), should be applied retroactively, I concur based on the doctrine of stare deci-sis, as I did in Roman Nose v. State, 845 N.W.2d 193, 204 (Minn.2014) (Lillehaug, J., concurring).
Four other state high courts have held that Miller is not retroactive, while ten disagree. See Martin v. Symmes, 782 F.3d 939, 945 (8th Cir.2015). I share Justice G. Barry Anderson’s hope that the issue will soon be resolved by the United States Supreme Court. Whether Miller is retroactive should not vary from state to state and from juvenile to juvenile.