State v. Smart
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EASTAUGH, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
The question presented in these two cases is whether the right to a jury trial announced in Blakely v. Washington 1 should be retroactively applied to two state defendants, Troy Smart and Henry Douglas, whose sentences were final before June 24, 2004, when Blakety was decided. Blakely requires that any fact-except a fact admitted by the defendant or the fact of a prior conviction-necessary to increase a sentence above the statutory presumptive maximum be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. We decline to give Blakely full retroactivity. We…
2Cases cited76 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ClarkeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
- Rhoades v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Florida · 2013
- Douglas v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
- Charles v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.