200 likes | 374 Views
The Road to Allen and the Revised Structured Sentencing Laws. Jones v. United States (USSC 1999)Federal carjacking statute imposed higher penalties if offense resulted in serious bodily injury or death Footnote suggested that under Due Process Clause of Fifth Amendment and notice and jury trial gu
E N D
2. The Road to Allen and the Revised Structured Sentencing Laws Jones v. United States (USSC 1999)
Federal carjacking statute imposed higher penalties if offense resulted in serious bodily injury or death
Footnote suggested that under Due Process Clause of Fifth Amendment and notice and jury trial guarantees of Sixth Amendment, any fact (other than prior conviction) that increases maximum penalty for crime must be charged in indictment, submitted to jury, and proven beyond reasonable doubt.
3. Apprendi Applies Jones as Constitutional Requirement Apprendi v. New Jersey (USSC 2000)
State hate crime statute authorized higher maximum sentence if defendant committed offense based on victim’s characteristics
Any fact (other than a prior conviction) that increases the punishment for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be submitted to jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt
Court declines to decide indictment issue
4. NC Recognizes Apprendi for Enhancements State v. Lucas (NCSC 2001)
NC statute imposed extra 60 months for A through E felony if defendant possessed firearm
Maximum sentence for structured sentencing purposes is theoretical maximum, which for felony sentencing is top of aggravated range in prior record level VI
Based on theoretical defendant, imposition of firearm enhancement always exceeds theoretical maximum
But, aggravators and prior record points would never increase sentence beyond theoretical maximum
5. More Lucas Facts supporting enhancement must be alleged in indictment (as matter of state law), submitted to jury, and proven beyond reasonable doubt
Statute then in effect did not contemplate this procedure, but state could seek enhancement if it complied with requirements identified by court
In 2003, legislature codified Lucas requirements in firearm enhancement statute (and other enhancement statutes)
6. Scalia Drops the Other Boot Blakely v. Washington (USSC 2004)
Based on assorted sentencing factors, state statute authorized higher sentence than standard range
Statutory maximum for Apprendi purposes is maximum sentence judge may impose based solely on facts reflected in jury verdict or admitted by defendant
7. Our Supreme Court Responds State v. Allen (NCSC July 1, 2005)
Statutory maximum under Blakely is top of presumptive range within each prior record level
Overruling that portion of Lucas
Any fact (other than prior conviction) that increases punishment beyond statutory maximum must be admitted by defendant or decided by jury beyond reasonable doubt
Court overrules portion of Lucas requiring factors to be alleged in indictment
But, court’s ruling does not affect statutory pleading requirements enacted by legislature
8. More of Allen Structured sentencing provisions that allow aggravated sentence based on judge’s findings by preponderance of evidence unconstitutional
Imposition of aggravated sentence in violation of these requirements is structural error, requiring resentencing in every case
9. Speight Speaks . . . quietly State v. Speight (NCSC July 1, 2005)
Allen applies to DWI cases tried in superior court
Non-conviction GAFs and AFs must be submitted to jury and found beyond reasonable doubt (although need not be alleged in indictment). Accord Cruz, NCCA, 10/18/2005
Speight suggests, but does not hold, that Allen applies only to cases in which defendant has jury trial right
Thus, Blakely requirements might not apply to non-conviction GAFs and AFs in DWI cases in district court
10. The Legislature Speaks . . .on Structured Sentencing Only Legislature revises SS statutes for offenses committed on or after June 30, 2005
Allen therefore applies to offenses committed before June 30, 2005
DWI bill must await next session
11. “Blakely” Bill Unless admitted by defendant, jury must find following beyond reasonable doubt
All aggravators
But not that defendant has been adjudicated delinquent for A through E felony
Prior record point of being on probation, parole, etc., at time of offense
But not prior convictions and not prior record point for all elements of present offense being included in prior offense
12. Felony Plea Requirements Determine whether state is seeking aggravated sentence and prior record point that defendant was on probation, parole, etc.
Determine whether state has complied with notice requirements or defendant has waived notice
State must give written notice, at least 30 days before trial or guilty plea, of statutory aggravators and prior record point that defendant on probation, parole, etc.
State must get indictment or information for nonstatutory aggravators
13. Felony Pleas If defendant admits to aggravators or prior record point, sentencing judge must
comply with 15A-1022
advise defendant of right to jury trial and right to prove mitigators at sentencing hearing
determine that there is factual basis for admission and that admission is result of informed choice of defendant
determine mitigators and balance
14. The Court of Appeals Does Its Best Aggravators
Lots of cases vacate aggravated sentence based on judge’s finding of aggravators.
But NCSC has stayed some of decisions
USSC granted cert. on 10/17 in State v. Recuenco, 110 P.3d 188 (Wash. 2005), to determine whether Blakely error can be harmless
Aggravator that defendant was adjudicated delinquent for A through E felony must go to jury (Yarrell)
Decision inconsistent with new statute
NCSC issues temporary stay
15. More Court of Appeals Decisions Prior record points
Prior record point that defendant was on probation, parole, etc., must go to jury (Yarrell; Wissink; Shine, 10/18/2005)
Decisions consistent with new statute
NCSC issues temporary stay
Prior record point that all elements of present offense included in prior offense does not have to go to jury (Poore)
Decision consistent with new statute
No stay issued
16. Improper Findings of Aggravators Stipulations to aggravators
Stipulation may not be sufficient basis on which to aggravate sentence because not knowing and intelligent waiver of jury trial right (Everette; Wissink; Meynardie; Whitehead, 10/18/2005)
Decisions consistent with procedure in new statute
NCSC issues temporary stay
But see Dierdorf, 10/18/2005 (stipulation to be sentenced in aggravated range was sufficient for aggravator)
Presumptive range
If aggravator found by judge, even presumptive sentence improper (Norris)
Consistent or inconsistent with new statute???
NCSC issues temporary stay
17. Sentencing for Misdemeanors Subject to SS
For offenses before or after June 30, 2005, Blakely does not affect how you do structured sentencing for misdemeanors
Allen states that it does not apply to prior convictions
Blakely bill does not apply to misdemeanors
But, beware statutes governing particular offenses, which may make enhancement an element of offense
For example, repeat shoplifting
18. Sentencing for Impaired Driving Statutory GAFs and AFs need not be pled for you to consider them
Not required by Allen, which Speight followed, whether or not Blakely applies to district court
Blakely bill does not apply to DWIs
But, if Blakely does apply to misdemeanors in district court
state may, as constitutional matter, need to give at least some notice of non-statutory AFs
19. More Impaired Driving If Blakely applies in district court, you may use non-conviction GAFs and AFs only if you find the factors beyond reasonable doubt or defendant admits them
You may need admissible evidence of factors
If Blakely applies,
Level III is subject to above
Level IV is subject to above unless there are no AFs and no mitigators
Level V may be subject to above if there is AF
20. Felony Pleas for Offenses Committed after June 30 Use aggravator only if defendant admits aggravator
Do this even for aggravator that defendant adjudicated delinquent of A through E felony until appellate courts say otherwise
Do this even when sentencing in presumptive range until appellate courts say otherwise
You may count prior record point that defendant was on probation, parole, etc., only if defendant admits point
You may do above without state having given written notice if defendant waives notice
Take admissions with essentially same formality as guilty plea
No admission required for prior convictions or prior record point that elements of present offense included in prior offense
Determine mitigators and balance
21. Felony Pleas for Offenses Committed before June 30 Use aggravator only if defendant admits aggravator
Do this even for aggravator that defendant adjudicated delinquent of A through E felony until appellate courts say otherwise
Do this even when sentencing in presumptive range until appellate courts say otherwise
You may count prior record point that defendant was on probation, parole, etc., only if defendant admits point
You probably may do above without state having given written notice
But you may need notice or waiver of notice for nonstatutory aggravator
Take admissions with essentially same formality as guilty plea until appellate courts say otherwise
No admission required for prior convictions or prior record point that all elements of present offense included in prior offense
Determine mitigators and balance