« Noting lengthy struggles in California over the definition of a violent crime | Main | SCOTUS grants cert on structural SORNA issue and Justice Sotomayor dissents in capital case with IAC issues »

March 5, 2018

"Sixth Amendment Sentencing after Hurst"

The title of this post is the title of this notable new article authored by Carissa Byrne Hessick and William Berry available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Hurst v. Florida, which struck down Florida’s capital sentencing scheme, altered the Court’s Sixth Amendment sentencing doctrine. That doctrine has undergone several important changes since it was first recognized.  At times the doctrine has expanded—invalidating sentencing practices across the country — and at times it has contracted — allowing restrictions on judicial sentencing discretion based on findings that are not submitted to a jury. Hurst represents another expansion of the doctrine.  Although the precise scope of the decision is unclear, the most sensible reading of Hurst suggests that any finding required before a judge may impose a higher sentence must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  This reading invalidates several state capital sentencing systems and several non-capital systems, and it would require dramatic changes to federal sentencing as well.

March 5, 2018 at 12:33 AM | Permalink


"That doctrine has undergone several important changes since it was first recognized."

Recognized? It does not exist.

All changes have been in the director of adding procedure and increasing jobs for lawyers. Change is never in the direction of reducing procedure because such procedure is quackery, and quackery violates the constitution.

Posted by: David Behar | Mar 5, 2018 1:03:33 AM

We have timestamps on this blog to the second but no chance to delete or edit our comments at all after they post. Win some, lose some.

Posted by: Joe | Mar 5, 2018 12:17:00 PM

Joe.I have never seen anyone mock another's punctuation or grammar. What I have seen are left wing, tax sucking, subhuman, pro-criminal scum, engage in only personal insult, copying the procedure out the KGB handbook from where these dirty rent seeking Commies came from.

Most of the time, people know what you meant when you make a msitake.

Posted by: David Behar | Mar 5, 2018 6:31:52 PM

Not sure that Hurst said anything that Ring didn't say. And anything new granted in Hurst was quickly taken back the following week in Carr.

Posted by: tmm | Mar 6, 2018 5:24:54 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