Legal Opinion
State v. Bowen
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided June 11, 2008No. 040935242; A129141PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, P. J.
Defendant petitions for reconsideration in this criminal case, arguing that we erred in rejecting his challenge to consecutive sentences based on the rule of law announced in Blakely v. Washington, 542 US 296, 124 S Ct 2531, 159 L Ed 2d 403 (2004), and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 US 466, 120 S Ct 2348, 147 L Ed 2d 435 (2000), that facts used to enhance a penalty for a crime, other than prior convictions or facts admitted by the defendant, must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Bowen, 215 Or App 199, 168 P3d 1208 (2007) (relying on State v. Tanner, 210 Or App 70, 150 P3d…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Washington v. RecuencoSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- State v. ArdizzoneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- State v. Camacho-AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- State v. CobbCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
- State v. BergCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
- State v. BainbridgeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.