State v. Sawatzky
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, J.
This is an original mandamus proceeding. Relator, Sawatzky, pleaded guilty to a number of crimes. At her original sentencing, the trial judge found that there were “substantial and compelling reasons justifying a deviation” from the presumptive sentences for those crimes and, based on that determination, imposed sentences that exceeded the presumptive ranges. Relator appealed to the Court of Appeals. That court concluded that the imposition of “enhanced” sentences violated relator’s Sixth Amendment jury trial right under the principles articulated in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 US 466, 120 S…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Hurtado v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. Azad Haji AbdullahIdaho Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- Hankerson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- State v. HessOregon Supreme Court · 2007
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.