Stanley v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Stanley's convictions and revised sentence, holding that three mandatory life sentences for his habitual-offender convictions were not grossly disproportionate under the Eighth Amendment. The Court also held that Stanley's challenge to the earlier sentencing hearing was moot because the original sentence had been vacated and an adequate hearing occurred on remand. Additional unpreserved claims failed under plain-error or abuse-of-discretion review, and the ineffective-assistance claims were not cognizable on direct appeal.