from Jefferson Circuit Court. (CC-94-3625.61).
Judge. Windom, P.J., and Welch, Burke, and Joiner, JJ.,
On Application for Rehearing
opinion issued on September 5, 2014, is withdrawn, and the
following opinion is substituted therefor.
State of Alabama appeals the circuit court's order
granting Louis Christopher Mangione's petition for
postconviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 32, Ala. R.
November 1995, Mangione was convicted of one count of capital
murder and one count of intentional murder in connection with
the murder of Vicki Deblieux. Mangione was 16 years old at
the time of the offense. He was sentenced to life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole for the
capital-murder conviction and to life imprisonment for the
On appeal, this Court affirmed Mangione's conviction and
sentence for capital-murder, but reversed his conviction and
sentence for intentional murder on the ground that it
violated double-jeopardy principles. Mangione v.
State, 740 So.2d 444 (Ala.Crim.App. 1998). The Alabama
Supreme Court denied certiorari review, and this Court issued
a certificate of judgment on December 7, 1999.
through counsel, filed this, his second, Rule 32 petition on
June 18, 2013. In his petition, Mangione argued that because
he was 16 years old at the time of the crime, his mandatory
sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of
parole for his capital-murder conviction was
unconstitutional. Specifically, he argued that the United
States Supreme Court's opinion in Miller v.
Alabama, __ U.S. __, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407
(2012) -- in which the Supreme Court held unconstitutional
statutory sentencing schemes mandating sentences of life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole for juvenile
offenders -- required that he be given a new sentencing
hearing. The State filed a motion to dismiss Mangione's
petition on July 10, 2013, arguing that Mangione's claim
was precluded by Rules 32.2(a)(3), (a)(5), and (b), and that
Miller, supra, did not apply retroactively to cases on
collateral review. On August 9, 2013, Mangione filed a reply
to the State's response, arguing that Miller applied
retroactively on collateral review. On September 24, 2013,
the circuit court held a hearing on the petition. The parties
subsequently filed post-hearing briefs in support of their
respective positions. On February 28, 2014, the circuit court
issued an order granting Mangione's Rule 32 petition,
finding that Miller applied retroactively on collateral
review, and ordering that Mangione be resentenced.
State argues on appeal, as it did in its motion to dismiss,
that Mangione's claim was precluded by Rules 32.2(a)(3),
(a)(5), and (b), and that Miller does not apply retroactively
to cases on collateral review. The facts in this case are not
in dispute, and the question before this Court on appeal --
whether the rule announced in Miller is retroactive -- is
purely legal. Therefore, we apply a de novo standard of
review. See Acra v. State, 105 So.3d 460, 464
Williams v. State, [Ms. CR-12-1862, April 4, 2014]
183 So.3d 198 (Ala. Crim. App.), this Court addressed and
rejected the same arguments Mangione raised in his Rule 32
petition. Specifically, this Court held in Williams: (1) that
a postconviction claim that a mandatory sentence of life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole for a juvenile
is unconstitutional under Miller is not a valid ground for
postconviction relief under Rule 32.1(b) or Rule 32.1(c), but
is a constitutional claim properly raised only under Rule
32.1(a); and (2) that Miller does not apply retroactively to
cases on collateral review. __ So.3d at __.
to this Court's holding in Williams, Mangione was not
entitled to relief on his challenge to his sentence of life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole, and the
circuit court erred in granting Mangione's Rule 32
petition. Therefore, the judgment of the circuit court ...