State v. Williams-Bey

Summary

Justice Ecker, dissenting, would hold that applying a mandatory minimum sentence to a juvenile offender without an individualized sentencing hearing violates the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The dissent would also conclude that parole eligibility does not substitute for a constitutionally adequate sentencing proceeding and that the defendant is entitled to retroactive resentencing relief. Justice Ecker would reverse and remand for consideration of the state’s waiver argument.