Tolliver v. Louisiana

Background

A person asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision from the Supreme Court of Louisiana and also asked to proceed without paying court fees. The U.S. Supreme Court granted the fee request and the petition, then vacated the Louisiana judgment and sent the case back for further consideration in light of Montgomery.

Reasoning

The Court’s action was procedural: it held many petitions while Montgomery was pending and then issued a grant-vacate-remand so the state court can reconsider this case under Montgomery’s rules. The majority did not decide whether the person is entitled to retroactive relief. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Alito, wrote separately to emphasize that sending the case back does not mean the U.S. Supreme Court has taken a position on whether state-law grounds, plea agreements, or other procedural issues bar relief, or whether the sentence truly counts as a mandatory life-without-parole sentence.

Real world impact

On remand, the Louisiana Supreme Court must reexamine the case under Montgomery, giving the person another opportunity to seek retroactive relief in state court. The outcome is not final: the state court could deny relief because of state procedural rules, plea waivers, or because the sentence is not the kind Montgomery addressed. This order does not itself grant relief or resolve the merits.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Thomas’s concurrence clarifies that the Court’s grant-vacate-remand should not be read as resolving entitlement to relief or as commenting on procedural barriers to relief.