Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Jess

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 2008No. 28483Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

ACOBA, J.

I respectfully dissent.

*419First, this proceeding should be dismissed and the ease remanded. The order of the United States District Court (district court) has already directed that the court must comply with Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000),1 that is, that if Plaintiff-Appellant State of Hawai'i (the prosecution) seeks an extended term, then Defendant-Appellee Brian Jess (Jess) must be afforded the option of a jury tidal on the sentencing facts. Additionally, that he is entitled to one is already settled in this…

2Cases cited77 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

72 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