State v. Siers
Washington Supreme Court
1Concurrence
Stephens J.
f24 (concurring) — While I agree with the majority that Brian Siers’s conviction stands, I disagree with its analysis. The majority is too quick to seize this opportunity to overrule Powell. In doing so, it overlooks the fact that Powell’s rule does not even apply to this case.
¶25 In State v. Powell, five justices agreed that aggravating factors must be charged in the information and proved to a jury before an enhanced sentence may be imposed. 167 Wn.2d 672, 688, 223 P.3d 493 (2009) (plurality opinion) (Stephens, J., concurring). This requirement stems from the Sixth Amendment,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Citizens United v. Federal Election CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Vasquez v. HillerySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.