More on Blakely

In a footnote in U.S. v. Burrell, Chief Judge Jones notes in connection of whether the defendant's prior conviction for something or other was a "crime of violence" under the federal sentencing guidelines: "Because this determination is a matter of law and not of fact, my decision does not implicate the principles of Blakely v. Washington, No. 02-1632, 2004 WL 1402697 (U.S. June 24, 2004). Moreover, the fact of prior conviction is not the type of fact requiring jury determination. See Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 488 (2000)."

In this post, Ken Lammers said the following waiver language is being tried with mixed success by some federal prosecutors following Blakely:

I am also waiving any right I may have for a jury determination of any and all facts relevant to the application of any Sentencing Guideline factors by the United States District Judge. I agree the District Judge should make the Sentencing Guideline determination using the preponderance of the evidence standard. I understand that by signing this plea agreement I waive any right to a jury determination of sentencing factors that may exist under Blakely and Apprendi, and any case interpreting these two Supreme Court decisions.

Via How Appealing, here is an interesting profile of the 33 year-old lawyer from Washington State who won the Blakely case.