« The plain error madness continues in the 4th Circuit | Main | The meddling resulting from Medellin »
March 9, 2005
The Indiana Supreme Court speaks on Blakely!
In what appears to be the most comprehensive state supreme court decision to date (and the first major post-Booker state supreme court ruling), the Indiana Supreme Court today has ruled on Blakely's applicability to Indiana's sentencing structure in Smylie v. Indiana, No. 41 SO 1-0409-CR-408 (Ind. Mar. 9, 2005) (available here courtesy of The Indiana Law Blog, which already has highlights here).
Smylie appears to be, from a quick skim, a very thorough and thoughtful decision (and I was very pleased and flattered to see this blog getting a "shout out" in footnote 12 of the Court's opinion, although The Indiana Law Blog notes here that I am slightly mis-cited). The Indiana Supreme Court in Smylie has held Blakely applicable to Indiana's laws and has concluded that Blakely-ization (and not Booker-ization) is the appropriate remedy — i.e., the Court rejects the suggestion to make its statutory sentencing structure advisory and instead calls for jury determinations of sentence enhancing facts.
The Smylie decision also covers some retroactivity issues and is certainly today's must-read for Blakely addicts. I am already looking forward to Marci Oddi's commentary at The Indiana Law Blog and also Michale Ausbrook's at INCourts.
March 9, 2005 at 04:25 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d83472c53c69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Indiana Supreme Court speaks on Blakely!:
Comments
As one of the attorneys who relief on Indiana mid-level appellate court decisions in State v. Natale, which will be argued in the N.J. Supreme Court on 3/14, let me say "three cheers to the Indiana Supreme Court!" for deciding the Blakely question correctly and for rejecting the Booker severance.
Posted by: Steve | Mar 9, 2005 6:52:58 PM
particularly with respect to the common sense "error preservation" section. there was no error to preserve! good for indiana!
Posted by: Jim | Mar 9, 2005 11:03:29 PM
