Legal Opinion

State v. Westbrook

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 30, 2008No. 2004-23125, 2004-23277, 2005-05744, 2004-23624, 2005-05745, 2005-07054, A128352 (Control) A128353, A128354, A129155 to A129157PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, P. J.

Defendant, who was convicted of multiple crimes in six consolidated cases, 1 challenges the sentencing court’s imposition of consecutive sentences on three of his convictions for first-degree burglary, ORS 164.225, arguing that he was entitled under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution to a jury determination of facts to support the imposition of consecutive sentences. See Blakely v. Washington, 542 US 296, 124 S Ct 2531, 159 L Ed 2d 403 (2004); Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 US 466, 120 S Ct 2348, 147 L Ed 2d 435 (2000); State v. Ice, 343 Or 248,170 P3d 1049 (2007), cert…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. State v. IceOregon Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Michael v. CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICESSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  5. State v. YarborCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. Calderon-OrtizCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  2. State v. WestbrookCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. State v. WestbrookCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. State v. WestbrookCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API