In a nice bit of timing, on Friday the Times featured Todd Spitzer's rejection of an attempt to rationalize California's criminal sentencing process and take politics out of it, and today the U.S. Supreme Court declared the state's Determinate Sentencing Law unconstitutional.
The Associated Press reports:
The 6-3 ruling in Cunningham v. California effectively shaves four years off the 16-year sentence of former police officer John Cunningham, who was convicted of sexually abusing his son.
It's the latest in a series of high court rulings over the past seven years that limit judges' discretion in sentencing defendants. The court has held repeatedly that a judge may not increase a defendant's sentence based on factors that were not determined by a jury.
"This court has repeatedly held that, under the Sixth Amendment, any fact that exposes a defendant to a greater potential sentence must be found by the jury, not a judge, and established beyond a reasonable doubt, not merely by a preponderance of the evidence," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the court.
[…]
Rather than prescribing a way to fix the law, Ginsburg said, "The ball lies in California's court."
Orange County Weekly - The Blotter » Little Hoover, Big Words says:
[...] The Little Hoover Commission* (the bipartisan, independent state commission dedicated to "promoting economy, efficiency and improved service in the transaction of public business") has issued a new report on the state prison system, one that neatly dovetails with recent Blotter posts on sentencing and politics. And for such a nice bunch of technocrats, the Lil' Hooverites are using awfully tough language. [...]
Posted on Friday, Jan. 26 2007 @ 10:01AM