BLAKELY V. WASHINGTON 542 U.S. 6 (2004) CASE BRIEF

BLAKELY V. WASHINGTON

542 U.S. 296 (2004)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Blakely (D) appealed an affirmation of his sentence with the Washington Court of Appeals rejecting D's argument that the sentencing procedure deprived him of his federal constitutional right to have a jury determine beyond a reasonable doubt all facts legally essential to his sentence.

FACTS: Blakely (D) abducted his estranged wife from their home binding her with duct tape and forcing her at knifepoint into a wooden box in the bed of his pickup truck. In the process, he implored her to dismiss the divorce suit and related trust proceedings. Their son was ordered by D to get in a car or his mother would be harmed. The boy escaped at a gas station and D was apprehended. D was charged with first-degree kidnapping. By plea agreement it was reduced to second-degree kidnapping involving domestic violence and use of a firearm. P entered a guilty plea admitting the elements of second-degree kidnapping and the domestic-violence and firearm allegations, but no other relevant facts. State law was clear on the sentencing requirements. A judge had the power to impose a sentence above the standard range if she finds 'substantial and compelling reasons justifying an exceptional sentence.' When a judge imposes an exceptional sentence, she must set forth findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting it. The State recommended a sentence within the standard range of 49 to 53 months. After hearing the facts, the judge rejected the State's recommendation and imposed an exceptional sentence of 90 months--37 months beyond the standard maximum: D had acted with 'deliberate cruelty,' a statutorily enumerated ground for departure in domestic-violence cases. D objected. The judge accordingly conducted a 3-day bench hearing featuring testimony from D, Yolanda, Ralphy, a police officer, and medical experts. Thirty-two findings of fact were made. The judge adhered to his initial determination of deliberate cruelty. D appealed. The State Court of Appeals affirmed. The Washington Supreme Court denied discretionary review. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner