People v. Harris

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly denied defendant’s motion seeking leave to file successive petition for post-conviction relief that made claim that defendant was actually innocent of murder charges, and that his mandatory life sentence was unconstitutional, because he was only 21 years old at time of charged offenses. Appellate Court, in affirming trial court, held that: (1) defendant could not establish colorable claim of actual innocence based on affidavit of witness who claimed that someone else had committed murders, since defendant had failed to demonstrate that said affidavit constituted “new evidence” that he could not have discovered prior to trial; and (2) defendant’s proportionate penalties clause claim regarding his life sentence fails because, at age 21, defendant was not “young adult offender.” for purposes of advancing claim under Miller, 567 U.S. 460, and because defendant failed to establish cause and prejudice warranting leave to file successive post-conviction petition.