Apprendi/Blakely, Facts Allowing Consecutive Sentence

Criminal Law Update

Oregon v Ice, __ US__; 129 S Ct 711 (2009)(jan‘09).The Sixth Amendment, as construed inApprendi v New JerseyandBlakely v Washington, does not inhibit states from assigning to judges, rather than to juries, the finding of facts necessary to the imposition of consecutive, rather than concurrent, sentences for multiple offenses. The Supreme Court believed that historical practice and respect for state sovereignty are strong reasons to not extend theApprendi andBlakelyline of decisions to the imposition of sentences for discrete crimes, but rather keep them within the offense-specific context that supplied the historic grounding for the decisions.