Legal Opinion

State v. Schmidt

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 2009No. CR-08-0308-PRPublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BALES, Justice.

¶ 1 Under Arizona law, those convicted of a ciime are subject to longer sentences when certain aggravating factors are proved. We hold that a court may not, consistent with due process, increase a defendant’s maximum potential sentence based solely on a so-called “catch-all” aggravator, defined as “any other factors which the court may deem appropriate to the ends of justice.” Ariz.Rev.Stat. (“A.R.S.”) § 13-702(D)(13) (Supp.1991). 1

I

¶ 2 In April 1993, Michael Dimetrius Schmidt entered into an agreement under which he pled guilty to two of eight offenses charged in an…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Dale Shawn HausnerArizona Supreme Court · 2012
  2. State v. ZINSMEYERCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  3. State of Arizona v. Austin James BonfiglioArizona Supreme Court · 2013
  4. State of Arizona v. Joel Agustin LopezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  5. State v. CoulterCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014

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

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

Powered by the Exa API