¶1The opinion issued on September 5, 2014, is withdrawn, and the following opinion is substituted therefor.
¶2The 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.Crim. P,
¶3In 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 capitál-múrdér conviction and to life imprisonment for the, murder con*500viction. 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.
¶4Mangione, through counsel, filed this, his second,
¶5The 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 Millerdoes 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 Milleris retroactive — is purely legal. Therefore, we apply a de novo standard of review. See Acra v. State, 105 So.3d 460, 464 (Ala.Crim.App.2012).
¶6In Williams v. State, 183 So.3d 201 (Ala.Crim.App.2014), this Court addressed and rejected the same arguments Mangiope 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 Milleris 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 Millerdoes not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review. 183 So.3d at 202.
¶7Pursuant 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 is reversed and this cause remanded .for proceedings consistent with this opinion, ... , .,,
¶8APPLICATION FOR • REHEARING OVERRULED; OPINION OF SEPTEMBER. 5, 2014, WITHDRAWN; OPINION *501SUBSTITUTED; REVERSED AND REMANDED.
¶9. Mangione filed his first petition in 2000, and the Circuit court denied the petition, This Court dismissed Mangione’s appeal from that dismissal for .failure to file a brief (case no. CR-01-0451).