Oregon Supreme Court· 12/30/2005

State v. Upton

Citations

125 P.3d 713
339 Or. 673
2005 Ore. LEXIS 814

How courts have described this case

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

holding that, before the enactment of SB 528, courts had authority under ORS 136.030 and ORS 136.320 to empanel juries to determine enhancement facts
analyzing Oregon’s reformed extended term sentencing statute, instigated in response to Apprendi and Blakely, wherein the fact-finding function was assigned to the jury and concluding: (1
analyzing Oregon's reformed extended term sentencing statute, instigated in response to Apprendi and Blakely, wherein the fact-finding function was assigned to the jury and concluding: (1
“A sentence that exceeds, or is below, a presumptive sentencing range may be based on a single factor[.]”
facts supporting upward departure implicate a defendant’s jury trial right and are subject to Oregon Laws 2005, chapter 463, procedures
“Generally, the ex post facto clauses of both constitutions prohibit retroactive legislation that makes actions criminal after the fact, or increase the punishment for previously committed acts.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: De Muniz

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.