With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". above assertion, appellant further argues that non-binding state court precedent establishes that the use of life sentences without parole in juvenile cases has become unusual as defined by the Eighth Amendment and, thus, should be per se barred. Based on a review of these cases, we do not agree. First, each of the state court cases cited by appellant involves an as applied consideration of appellant’s sentencing claim. There is no per se rule in any state rejecting the use of life sentences for juveniles in every case; each of the cases cited by appellant involves a fact-specific inquiry into the disproportionate nature of the sentence imposed to the nature of the offense and/or the appellant’s age. See People v. Miller, 202 Ill.2d 328, 269 Ill.Dec. 503, 781 N.E.2d 300, 302-08 (2002) (<HOLDING>); Naovarath v. State, 105 Nev. 525, 779 P.2d

A: holding juveniles do not have constitutional right to a jury trial but striking down statute that allowed juveniles to receive adult sentence without a jury trial three justices dissented reasoning juveniles should be entitled to a juiy trial under all cases because changes to juvenile justice code treated juveniles like criminals
B: holding that the imposition of a life sentence without parole for a fifteenyearold juveniles offense of acting as a lookout during the commission of multiple murders would violate illinoiss constitutional equivalent of the eighth amendment as applied to appellant but acknowledging the legality of the sentences use against juveniles guilty of committing more heinous crimes
C: holding that life without parole sentences for nonhomicide offenses violates the eighth amendment
D: holding that consecutive fixedterm sentences for juveniles who committed multiple nonhomicide offenses are not clearly unconstitutional under graham even when they amount to the practical equivalent of life without parole
B.