<< News Scan | Main | Confrontation and the Murdered Witness >>


Cunningham Sequel Tomorrow

| 0 Comments

Tomorrow, the California Supreme Court will announce its decision in People v. Towne, S125677. This case is another sequel to Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007), the case that applied the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) to California's three-tier determinate sentencing system. The questions presented are after the jump.

(1) Do Cunningham v. California, supra, and Almendarez-Torres v. United States (1998) 523 U.S. 224, 239-247, permit the trial judge to sentence defendant to the upper term based on any or all of the following aggravating factors, without submitting them to a jury: the defendant's prior convictions as an adult are numerous and of increasing seriousness; the defendant has served a prior prison term; the defendant was on parole when the crime was committed; the defendant's prior performance on probation or parole was unsatisfactory (California Rules of Court, Rule 4.421, subds. (b)(2) - (b)(5))?
(2) Is there any violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights under Cunningham v. California, supra, if the defendant is eligible for the upper term based upon a single aggravating factor that has been established by means that satisfy the governing Sixth Amendment authorities - by, for example, a jury finding, the defendant's criminal history, or the defendant's admission - even if the trial judge relies on other aggravating factors (not established by such means) in exercising his or her discretion to select among the three sentences for which the defendant is eligible?

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives