« Effective district court review of SONRA enforcement issues | Main | Interesting state sentencing stories nationwide »

October 18, 2007

The consequences of Cunningham in Hawaii and Tennessee

With so much going on, I have failed to report previously that in the last few weeks the highest courts in both Hawaii and Tennessee have (finally) recognized that they have to live in Apprendi-land.  Specifically, recognizing the impact and import of the Supreme Court's ruling in Cunningham (which applied Blakely to California's structured sentencing system), the Supreme Courts of Hawaii and Tennessee have both recently held that their states' mandatory sentencing schemes create Sixth Amendment problems.

These recent rulings came in State v. Maugaotega (available here) and State v. Gomez (available here).  A local press report provide the basics in this article from Hawaii.  And BNA subscribers can read about both rulings at this link.

October 18, 2007 at 08:05 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200e54f0e34668834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The consequences of Cunningham in Hawaii and Tennessee:

Comments

Connecticut's high court has also recently struck down that state's "persistent dangerous felony offender" provisions, based on Blakely and Cunningham. State v. Bell, 2007 WL 2481026 (9/11/07).

Posted by: Andrew Fine | Oct 18, 2007 4:51:04 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