State v. Sawatzky

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “departure sentences, which require judicial findings of fact and are not, under the current [sentencing] scheme, based on facts found by the jury, do not comport with the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution”
• determining that imposition of upward departure sentence violated federal constitution, under principles articulated in Blakely v. Washington, 542 US 296, 124 S Ct 2531, 159 L Ed 2d 403 (2004
• determining that imposition of upward departure sentence violated federal constitution, under principles articulated in Blakely v. Washington, 542 US 296, 124 S Ct 2531, 159 L Ed 2d 403 (2004), without first addressing the defendant’s challenges based on the Oregon Constitution
• departure sentences under Oregon’s sentencing guidelines are inconsistent with Blakely
• applying Blakely to Oregon’s sentencing guidelines

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).