Full-term-consecutive-sentence mandate doesn’t violate the Sixth Amendment
Applying U.S. Supreme Court precedent, the California Supreme Court today holds in People v. Catarino that a statute requiring full-term consecutive prison sentences for certain sex crimes found by a judge to have been committed “on separate occasions” does not offend the Sixth Amendment jury trial right. Without the challenged statute, a judge would generally impose partial-term consecutive sentences and it’s the full-term mandate, not the consecutive-sentences requirement, that the defendant claimed was constitutionally objectionable.
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.