Oregon Supreme Court· 12/16/2004

State v. Dilts

Citations

103 P.3d 95
337 Or. 645
2004 Ore. LEXIS 827

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the Oregon sentencing guidelines are not facially unconstitutional; thus severability is inapplicable, and remanding to the trial court for implementation of the sentencing guidelines consistent with Blakely
holding that the Oregon sentencing guidelines are not facially unconstitutional; thus severability is inapplicable, and remanding to the trial court for implementation of the sentencing guidelines consistent with Blakely
holding that the Oregon sentencing guidelines are not facially unconstitutional; thus severability is inapplicable, and remanding to the trial court for implementation of the sentencing guidelines consistent with Blakely
holding that the rule in Apprendi applies to upward departure sentences
concluding that, consistently with Blakely v. Washington, 542 US_, 124 S Ct 2531,159 L Ed 2d 403 (2004), and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 US 466, 120 S Ct 2348, 147 L Ed 2d 435 (2000
holding, on remand in light of Blakely, that Apprendi applies to departure sentences

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Balmer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

59 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Dilts

5 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.