July 27, 2005
More on Ohio's Blakely cases
This AP story provides information about the argument in the Ohio Supreme Court yesterday in two big Blakely cases, as well as some broader background on how states have responded to Blakely. The oral arguments are archived on-line and can be watched here at the Ohio Supreme Court's website. I watched one of the arguments late last night and found the quality of the advocacy very high, which only served to make the issue of how Blakely should be applied in Ohio that much more confusing and challenging. (Background on Ohio's sentencing laws and Blakely's potential impact can be found here and here, and some of the interesting lower courts developments are discussed here and here.)
July 27, 2005 at 09:11 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on Ohio's Blakely cases:
Doug, what your thoughts as to the ex post facto problem raised at the tail end of John Martin's argument in Quinones?
Posted by: Jay Macke | Jul 27, 2005 11:39:12 AM
Doug, what your thoughts as to the ex post facto problem raised at the tail end (at about 41 min.) of John Martin's argument in Quinones? The upshot is that in order to Bookerize, the OSC would have to declare at least portions of SB2 unconstitutional, and that as for all of the defendants who were on direct appeal at the time Blakely was decided, they accordingly enjoyed a presumption of minimum concurrent sentences.
Posted by: Jay Macke | Jul 27, 2005 11:41:54 AM
I think the ex post facto claim is very interesting, but a similar one is getting a chilly reception in the federal courts. I think there are stronger reasons not too Booker-ize in Ohio, but we will see what the Ohio Supreme Court does will all of these tough questions soon (I hope).
Posted by: Doug B. | Jul 27, 2005 5:20:17 PM