More academic arguments for Blakely retroactivity

Though the Supreme Court seems to be in no rush to address Blakely or Booker retroactivity (details here) student scholars continue to address the important retroactivity issue.  As previously detailed here, my terrific research assistants has an article in the Ohio State Law Journal entitled "Justice for All: Analyzing Blakely Retroactivity and Ensuring Just Sentences in Pre-Blakely Convictions."  And now I have seen two other similar efforts:

• The Cardozo Law Review's latest issue includes a student note entitled "Is Blakely v. Washington Retroactive?" by Haifeng Peng.  Available here, the article argues that Blakely should be found retroactive on a number of theroies.

• The Wisconsin Law Review's forthcoming issue includes a Comment entitled "Reasonable Doubt in the Rear-View Mirror: The Case for Booker/Blakely Retroactivity in the Federal System" by Nic Eichenseer.  I have kindly been given permission to make the article available here: Download blakely_retroactivity_eichenseer_final_wpermission.doc

I wonder what might happen if every defendant subject to unconstitutonal judicial factfinding whose sentence was final before Blakely and Booker were to file habeas petitions with all three of these articles attached.