People v. Stafford

2 Citing cases

  1. People v. Stafford

    2018 Ill. App. 4th 140309 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018)   Cited 5 times
    Finding no Miller violation where the trial court determined the defendant's acts were " 'too senseless and too vicious to give a great deal of weight to his age, particularly given [his] history' " and multiple unsuccessful attempts at rehabilitation

    In February 2006, we affirmed defendant's sentence. People v. Stafford , No. 4–03–1011, 362 Ill.App.3d 1256, 335 Ill.Dec. 814, 919 N.E.2d 533 (Feb. 23, 2006) (unpublished order under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 23 ). ¶ 2 In June 2013, defendant filed a pro se postconviction petition alleging his life sentence was unconstitutional under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. Alabama , 567 U.S. 460, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), because he was 17 years old when the crime was committed and his life sentence violated the eighth amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment ( U.S. Const., amend. VIII ).

  2. People v. Stafford

    2016 Ill. App. 4th 140309 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016)   Cited 15 times
    Holding that because Castleberry did not establish a new rule under Teague , its holding does apply retroactively

    On appeal, defendant argued the trial court abused its discretion when it sentenced him to natural life in prison, and this court affirmed the trial court's judgment. People v. Stafford, No. 4–03–1011, 362 Ill.App.3d 1256, 335 Ill.Dec. 814, 919 N.E.2d 533 (Feb. 23, 2006) (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23 ). ¶ 2 In June 2013, defendant filed a pro se postconviction petition alleging his life sentence was unconstitutional under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), because he was 17 years old when the crime was committed and his life sentence violated the eighth amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. Const. amend. VIII.