Legal Opinion
Barrow v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Decided November 15, 2006No. PD-0194-05PublishedCited by 200 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
OPINION
2Opinion of the Court · PricePrice, J.
KELLER, P.J., and WOMACK, JOHNSON, KEASLER, HERVEY, HOLCOMB, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.
We granted the appellant’s petition for discretionary review to decide whether, under Apprendi v. New Jersey and its progeny,1 the trial court’s decision to cu-mulate his sentences violated his right to have the jury assess the facts that affect the maximum range of punishment. We also granted review of appellant’s claim that the judicial decision whether to cumu-late is so arbitrary as to violate due process. Finding no constitutional infirmity, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
The appellant was…
3Cases cited19 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Lockyer v. AndradeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by200 opinions
- People v. BlackCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Beedy v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2008
- Commonwealth v. FoustSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Rooney v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2010
- Ivey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2009
195 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.