« Another academic view on Blakely | Main | The full Blakely in Washington state »

October 26, 2004

California's messy Blakely landslide

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that, in the wake of the Blakely earthquake, a landslide of opinions are flowing from the California appellate courts. I noted here last month how fast and furious the action is in California, and now there are on-line nearly 100 appellate court cases from California that discuss Blakely.

And, as if the post-Blakely world in California was not messy enough, a reader highlighted today that Blakely has led to some noteworthy in-fighting among one appellate division. In People v. Eugene, D044043 (Cal. App. Ct. Oct. 25, 2004), and People v. Wagener, D042896 (Cal. App. Oct. 22, 2004), different panels of the same court split in very vocal ways over whether California's sentencing scheme is constitutional after Blakely.

As detailed here, briefing is far along in the two cases, People v. Towne and People v. Black, that the California Supreme Court is using to examine Blakely issues. Obviously, to bring greater order to California sentencing, decisions in these cases cannot come soon enough.

October 26, 2004 at 12:55 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d8346c2d6f69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference California's messy Blakely landslide:

Comments

I learned today that amicus briefs were submitted in People v. Black (S126182) on 11-19-04. The reply brief is due 2-3 weeks after, so roughly 12-03-04. Also learned of further action in People v. Towne (S125677): 10-20: reply brief received; 10-27-04: amicus brief filed; 11-17-04: Letter brief from counsel received. It appears it still may be a few weeks before a decision is reached :-<.

Posted by: Withheld | Dec 1, 2004 3:30:05 AM

wow this is quite stupido

Posted by: lilu | May 11, 2005 9:34:51 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB