« The WSJ on the federal Blakely mess | Main | Interesting murder sentencing case law »

December 28, 2004

The state of Blakely in various states

This morning's WSJ article (detailed here) provides a great review of the state of Blakely in the federal system, but I find the state of Blakely in the states an even more interesting and dynamic story.  Indeed, as detailed in some of my recent posts on the topic, the state Blakely story is too fast-moving and dynamic for me to track comprehensively.  (More background here and here and here.)

Fortunately, there other folks covering the Blakely story in particular states, and I can just report and link to their efforts.  Today I have helpful reports on Indiana, North Carolina and Texas.

INDIANA: As noted before here, Indiana's Blakely story is being well-covered by state lawyers there, and now I see that Michael Ausbrook at INCourts has this post which reviews all the Indiana cases that mention Blakely and their current status.

NORTH CAROLINA: This newpaper article provides a very effective review of the story of Blakely in North Carolina.  The article also details that the a subcommittee of the NC Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission "has recommended that aggravating factors and some issues related to prior records be submitted to a jury to determine if they exist."

TEXAS: With great thanks to Scott Henson at Grits for Breakfast, I can provide a link to this terrific research brief from the Texas Senate Research Center reviewing the story of Blakely in Texas.  Here is the astute conclusion of this effective report:

Because Texas does not have the sort of determinate sentencing guidelines used by the State of Washington or the federal government, Blakely will not significantly impact Texas law. However, there are specific statutes in the Code of Criminal Procedure that authorize a judge to make an affirmative finding of fact that may be used to increase the defendant’s punishment, but the statutes are not clear whether this affirmative finding must be based on facts proved beyond a reasonable doubt to the trier of fact. These and any similar statutes could be subject to challenge under Blakely.

December 28, 2004 at 11:07 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d83438b30a53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The state of Blakely in various states:

Comments

HI I WAS READING SOME OF YOUR ARTICLES AND I WASINTRIGUED. I HAVE A DAUGHTER WHO IS GOING TO BE SENTENCED FROM 10-40 FOR DURGS THEY FOUND ON HER, SOME NOT THAT MUCH BUT SHE HAD A CASE IN 1991 AND DID 7 MONTHS. HOWEVER I WAS WONDERING WILL THIS NEW LAW IF IT COMES TO PASS WOULD EFFECT HER. SHE IS TO BE SENTENCED FEB 4 FOR THE CRIME IN 2003. THEY HAVE BEEN POSTPONING IT BECAUSE OF THE BLAKELY CASE. ACCORDING TO HER LAWYER THEY SAID IF THE CASE WAS A STATE CASE AND THE FEDS DID NOT PICK IT UP SHE WOULD PROBABLY GET 2 YEARS. DO YOU THINK IF THEY PASS THIS LAW IN ILLINOIS HER YEARS COULD GO DOWN? PLEASE RESPOND. THANK YOU SHERYL

Posted by: sheryl pelmore | Jan 6, 2005 9:43:17 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