Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Smith v. Conn

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided October 14, 2004No. 1 CA-SA 04-0180PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMPSON, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 Petitioner State of Arizona brings this special action to challenge the trial court’s order denying the state’s motion to add an allegation of aggravating factors to the indictment and request for jury trial. According to the trial court, Blakely v. Washington, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), as applied to the Arizona statutory scheme, prohibits the imposition of an aggravated sentence, and there is no mechanism for imposing a sentence greater than the presumptive. For the following reasons, we accept special action jurisdiction and grant relief.

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Harris v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Summerfield v. Superior Court, Maricopa Cty.Arizona Supreme Court · 1985

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. MartinezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  2. Taylor v. CruikshankCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  3. State v. HendersonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  4. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  5. State v. DagueCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API