Larry Donelle Brown, Jr. v The State Of Oklahoma
F-2018-1222
Filed: Jan. 30, 2020
Not for publication
Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma
Summary
Larry Donelle Brown, Jr. appealed his conviction for first-degree murder. His conviction and sentence were life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Judge Sharon K. Holmes later resentenced him to life imprisonment with credit for time served. Brown argued that his life sentence was unfair because he committed the crime when he was only seventeen years old, claiming it violated his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The court found that Brown had not shown that his new sentence was the same as life without parole. They affirmed his sentence, stating that he could be eligible for parole since he had already served more than one-third of his time. The decision was unanimous among the judges, with no dissent.
Decision
The sentence is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2020), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.
Issues
- Was Appellant's life sentence in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and Oklahoma Constitution Article II, §§ 7 and 9?
- Did Appellant's sentence of life with the possibility of parole constitute a de facto life without parole sentence that violates the Eighth Amendment as interpreted in Miller v. Alabama?
- Did the Oklahoma parole process provide Appellant with a meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation?
- Has Appellant shown that he was denied parole consideration or that the parole process was unconstitutional?
- Does the low frequency of actual parole of violent offenders sentenced to life imprisonment indicate an unconstitutionally arbitrary or fundamentally unfair parole process?
Findings
- the court did not err in affirming the life sentence with the possibility of parole
- the evidence presented was not sufficient to show that the sentence constituted a de facto sentence of life without parole
F-2018-1222
Jan. 30, 2020
Larry Donelle Brown, Jr.
Appellantv
The State Of Oklahoma
Appellee
v
The State Of Oklahoma
Appellee
SUMMARY OPINION
LEWIS, PRESIDING JUDGE: Larry Donelle Brown, Jr., Appellant, entered a blind plea of guilty to first degree murder, in violation of 21 O.S.Supp. 1996, § 701.7(A), in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CF-1997-1409. The Honorable Jefferson D. Sellers, District Judge, sentenced Appellant to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. This Court granted post-conviction relief and remanded for resentencing in Brown v. State, No. PC-2017-933. The Honorable Sharon K. Holmes sentenced Appellant to life imprisonment and granted him credit for time served. Appellant appeals his resentencing in the following proposition of error: Appellant’s life sentence is in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and Oklahoma Constitution Article II, §§ 7 and 9.
In his proposition, Appellant argues that his sentence of life with the possibility of parole, for a murder he committed when he was seventeen years old, is a de facto sentence of life without parole that violates the Eighth Amendment as interpreted in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012). Appellant argues that the discretionary nature of the Oklahoma parole process, the absence of a rule requiring consideration of youth-related factors in parole decisions involving juvenile offenders, and the low frequency of actual parole of violent offenders sentenced to life imprisonment collectively deny him the meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation required for juvenile offenders serving life sentences. See Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 75 (2010).
This Court has rejected the view that a life sentence with the possibility of parole for a juvenile homicide offender violates Miller. Stevens v. State, 2018 OK CR 11, ¶ 31, 422 P. 3d 741, 749. (finding that the trial court, with agreement from the State, could remedy a Miller violation by modifying life without parole sentence to life imprisonment). The Supreme Court in Miller acknowledged that a state court may exercise its discretion to sentence a juvenile homicide offender to a lifetime prison term with the possibility of parole or a lengthy term of years consistent with the Eighth Amendment. Miller, 567 U.S. at 489. A State may properly redress a Miller sentencing error by allowing a juvenile homicide offender serving a life without parole sentence to be considered for parole. Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718, 736 (2016).
In this case, the trial court granted Appellant more than twenty-one years credit for time served against his current non-85% life sentence. Having completed more than 1/3 of that sentence, he appears to be eligible for consideration for parole. 57 O.S.Supp.2018, § 332.7(A). Appellant does not allege that he has been denied parole consideration, or denied fair notice and an opportunity to be heard in connection with that decision. He has not shown that parole officials systematically refuse to consider demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation in parole decisions. Low parole rates for violent offenders are not sufficient evidence of an unconstitutionally arbitrary or fundamentally unfair parole process.
Appellant has not shown convincingly that his sentence of life imprisonment is a de facto sentence of life without parole that violates the Eighth Amendment. This proposition requires no relief.
DECISION
The sentence is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2020), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY THE HONORABLE SHARON K. HOLMES, DISTRICT JUDGE
APPEARANCES AT TRIAL
DEBRA K. HAMPTON
3126 S. BOULEVARD, #304
EDMOND, OK 73013
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
APPEARANCES ON APPEAL
DEBRA K. HAMPTON
3126 S. BOULEVARD, #304
EDMOND, OK 73013
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
SEAN WATERS
ASST. DISTRICT ATTORNEY
500 S. DENVER, STE. 900
TULSA, OK 74103
MIKE HUNTER
ATTORNEY GENERAL
KEELEY L. MILLER
ASST. ATTORNEY GENERAL
313 N.E. 21ST STREET
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
OPINION BY: LEWIS, P.J.
KUEHN, V.P.J.: Concur
LUMPKIN, J.: Concur
HUDSON, J.: Concur
ROWLAND, J.: Concur
Footnotes:
- 21 O.S.Supp. 1996, § 701.7(A)
- Article II, §§ 7 and 9
- Miller U. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012)
- Graham U. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 75 (2010)
- Stevens U. State, 2018 OK CR 11, 1 31, 422 P. 3d 741, 749
- Miller, 567 U.S. at 489
- Montgomery U. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718, 736 (2016)
- 57 O.S.Supp.2018, § 332.7(A)
Oklahoma Statutes citations:
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.7 - First degree murder
- Okla. Stat. tit. 57 § 332.7 - Parole eligibility
Oklahoma Administrative Rules citations:
No Oklahoma administrative rules found.
U.S. Code citations:
No US Code citations found.
Other citations:
No other rule citations found.
Case citations:
- Brown v. State, No. PC-2017-933
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010)
- Stevens v. State, 2018 OK CR 11, 1 31, 422 P. 3d 741, 749
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718, 736 (2016)