State v. McCleese

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence because retroactive parole eligibility made his juvenile sentence constitutionally adequate and rendered the motion moot. It held that the parole statute did not violate state separation-of-powers principles or federal equal protection, and it treated the federal due-process claim as inadequately briefed while concluding that the statute, as enacted, eliminated any constitutional violation. Justice Ecker, dissenting, would have required resentencing because parole eligibility does not remedy the failure to conduct the constitutionally required individualized sentencing hearing; Justice Palmer, concurring, would defer any due-process issue to a case in which it is properly raised.