Legal Opinion

State v. Avery

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided March 10, 2006No. A-9031PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COATS, Chief Judge.

In Blakely v. Washington,1 the United States Supreme Court held that “[a]ny fact (other than a prior conviction) which is necessary to support a sentence exceeding the maximum authorized by the facts established by a plea of guilty or a jury verdict must be admitted by the defendant or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.”2 Avery, who had been sentenced -by Acting Superior Court Judge Jane F. Kauvar before the Blakely decision, filed a motion to correct his sentence under Alaska Criminal Rule 35(a), arguing that his sentence was illegal under Blakely because…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. Thomas v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
  5. State v. TinsleyCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1996

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Smart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006
  2. Baker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2008
  3. Smart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006
  4. State v. AveryCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API