Difference between revisions of "Washington v. Recuenco"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(cat) |
m (bold) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In ''Recuenco v. Washington'', 126 S. Ct. 2546 (2006), the [[United States Supreme Court]] held that [[harmless-error]] analysis applied to jury enhancements where a sentence increased based on a judge's own factual findings rather than a jury verdict. This 6-3 decision, written by Justice [[Clarence Thomas]] and joined by [[Antonin Scalia]], limited the scope of ''[[Blakely v. Washington]]'', 542 U.S. 296 (2004), with respect to sentence enhancements. This decision reinstated a sentence enhancement vacated by the Supreme Court of [[Washington]]. | + | In '''''Recuenco v. Washington''''', 126 S. Ct. 2546 (2006), the [[United States Supreme Court]] held that [[harmless-error]] analysis applied to jury enhancements where a sentence increased based on a judge's own factual findings rather than a jury verdict. This 6-3 decision, written by Justice [[Clarence Thomas]] and joined by [[Antonin Scalia]], limited the scope of ''[[Blakely v. Washington]]'', 542 U.S. 296 (2004), with respect to sentence enhancements. This decision reinstated a sentence enhancement vacated by the Supreme Court of [[Washington]]. |
| + | |||
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] | [[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] | ||
[[Category:Criminal Law]] | [[Category:Criminal Law]] | ||
Latest revision as of 23:52, May 4, 2008
In Recuenco v. Washington, 126 S. Ct. 2546 (2006), the United States Supreme Court held that harmless-error analysis applied to jury enhancements where a sentence increased based on a judge's own factual findings rather than a jury verdict. This 6-3 decision, written by Justice Clarence Thomas and joined by Antonin Scalia, limited the scope of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), with respect to sentence enhancements. This decision reinstated a sentence enhancement vacated by the Supreme Court of Washington.