State v. Benenati

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• vacating two-year sentencing enhancement because consideration of defendant’s release status was not decided by the jury
• agreeing with Gross and holding that release status adding two years to sentence as enhancement under § 13-604(R) must be determined by jury in light of Apprendi
• “[W]e choose to follow Apprendi’s logic, and Ring’s [v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S. Ct. 2428, 153 L. Ed. 2d 556 (2002),] clear message, that a fact exposing a defendant to increased sentencing, not the actual sentence imposed, is the litmus test.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).