State v. Mills
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*4¶1 In this case, we address whether a single element may be bifurcated from the “to convict” instruction to a special verdict form where such element elevates a base crime from a misdemeanor to a felony. We hold that such bifurcation is constitutionally permissible if the legislature has created a statutory framework that establishes a base crime with elevated penalties if an additional fact is present, and if the additional element is found beyond a reasonable doubt by a unanimous jury. However, in this case we find that the jury instructions did not clearly set forth the requirement that…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- State v. PirtleWashington Supreme Court · 1995
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by105 opinions
- State v. O'HaraWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. FisherWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. FisherWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. DavisWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. MasonWashington Supreme Court · 2007
100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.