Omer Ninham, who was 14 years old at the time, was convicted of first-degree intentional homicide for his role in beating a man and causing him to fall to his death. He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Ninham appealed his sentence, arguing that it was unconstitutional punishment for a 14-year-old and excessively harsh. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding that a life sentence without parole for a 14-year-old convicted of homicide was not categorically unconstitutional. The Court also determined that Ninham's sentence was not disproportionate to his crime and that his family's religious beliefs were not improperly considered in sentencing.

1. HaroldSowards
CJ 322, Tu/Th 9:30
8/29/15
State v. Ninham
797 N.W. 2d 451 (Wisconsin 2011)
1. Facts
 Defendant:OmerNinham
 Ninhamand4 otherjuvenilesbeatupVangandchase himaround town,until Ninham
dropshimoff a 45 ft wall causingVang to die fromcraniocerebral trauma
 Duringthe Pre-SentenceInvestigationitwasrevealedthatNinhamcomesfroman
extremelydysfunctional familystructure andhe isdescribedasaserioussubstance
abuserusingcocaine weeklyanddrinkingdaily,saidto be havingan interestinhis
Native Americanspirituality(MenomineeTribe)
 Ninhamisconvictedof 1st
degree intentionalhomicide andissentencedtolife inprison
withoutparole
 Filesamotionforrelief fromhislife sentence,asksforthe possibility of parole
 Circuitcourt deniesthis,appeals
 Supreme Courtaffirmsthisdecision
2. Issue
Is a life sentencefora14 yr oldan unconstitutional punishment?
Is Ninham’spunishmentharshandexcessive?
Didthe court use Ninham’sfamily’sreligiousbeliefsinimposinghissentence?
3. Holdings
No,affirmed
No,affirmed
No,affirmed
4. Reasoning
UsingGraham, 130 S.Ct.2011 theystatedthat Ninhamfailedtodemonstrateanational
consensusagainst14 yr oldsbeingsentencedtolifeimprisonmentw/oparole
Theyusedtheirownindependentjudgmenttosaythat the punishmentimposedisn’t
categoricallyunconstitutional.Hispunishmentmaybe severe,butitisnot disproportionate.
The evidence presentedof adolescence braindevelopmentwasn’tclearandconvincingand
therefore weren’trelevanttothem.