Greene v. Louisiana State Penitentiary

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM ORDER: This court will, accordingly, continue to monitor the proceedings related to Montgomery and will advise the parties when further action is needed. The State need not file an answer or brief until such is requested by the court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 01/28/2016. (crt,Williams, L)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION

CLIFTON COZER GREENE

CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-cv-3348

VERSUS

JUDGE FOOTE

N. BURL CAIN

MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Clifton C. Greene (“Petitioner”) was convicted of a first-degree murder committed in
August 1993 and given a mandatory sentence of life in prison without benefit of parole,
probation, or suspension of sentence. Petitioner states that he was 17 years old at the time
of his crime, and he seeks to challenge the constitutionality of his sentence in light of Miller
v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012), which held that mandatory life imprisonment without
parole for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes violates the Eighth
Amendment.
Petitioner had already filed one habeas petition that was decided on the merits of
different issues years ago. This court stayed this new action so Petitioner could seek the
required authorization of the Fifth Circuit to file a second or successive habeas petition. The
Fifth Circuit later granted Petitioner’s motion to file a successive application. Doc. 7.
This court then directed that the State be served and that the district attorney for
Sabine Parish file an appearance in the case. The court directed that the State need not file
an answer or brief at the time, as the court would monitor the proceedings in Montgomery

v. Louisiana, in which the Supreme Court had granted certiorari on whether Miller applied
retroactively to cases on collateral review (such as this one). The court stated that it would
advise the parties on how to respond once a ruling issued in that case.
The Supreme Court recently issued its decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 2016
WL 280758 (2016) and held that “Miller announced a substantive rule that is retroactive in
cases on collateral review.” The Court stated that its holding “does not require States to
relitigate sentences, let alone convictions, in every case where a juvenile offender received
mandatory life without parole.” It noted that a state may remedy a Miller violation by
permitting juvenile homicide offenders to be considered for parole, rather than by
resentencing them. It cited as an example recent Wyoming legislation that allowed juvenile
homicide offenders eligibility for parole after 25 years. The judgment of the Supreme Court
of Louisiana was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings not
inconsistent with the Montgomery opinion.
Louisiana faced a similar situation after Graham v. Florida, 130 S.Ct. 2011 (2010)
held that the Eighth Amendment forbids the imposition of life without parole for persons
who are under 18 when they committed crimes other than homicide. The Court directed that
states must provide some meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated
maturity and rehabilitation. That affected the sentences of some juvenile offenders in
Louisiana, which mandates a life sentence without parole for aggravated rape. The Supreme
Court of Louisiana declared a judicial remedy in State v. Shaffer, 77 So.3d 939 (La. 2011),

Page 2 of 3

and the legislature acted soon afterward by amending a parole statute to allow parole
consideration for such prisoners after certain conditions were met.

See Hedgespeth

v.Warden, 2015 WL 1089325 (W.D. La. 2015).
It will likely be a few months before the Supreme Court of Louisiana takes further
action in Montgomery. It is also possible that the Louisiana legislature will address the issue.
Either will likely go a long way in determining what relief may be available to Petitioner in
this case. This court will, accordingly, continue to monitor the proceedings related to
Montgomery and will advise the parties when further action is needed. The State need not
file an answer or brief until such is requested by the court.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 28th day of January,
2016.

Page 3 of 3