Document: 447 U.S. 343 100 S.Ct. 2227 65 L.Ed.2d 175 Flynn Noye HICKS, Petitioner,v.State of OKLAHOMA. No. 78-6885. Argued March 26, 1980. Decided June 16, Syllabus Upon the conviction petitioner, a twice previously convicted felon, in an Oklahoma trial court, jury imposed 40-year sentence pursuant to instructions do so under provision state habitual offender statute mandating such sentence. Thereafter, this was declared unconstitutional by Court Criminal Appeals another case, but that court nevertheless affirmed petitioner's and sentence, holding he not prejudiced impact invalid because his within range punishment could have been any event. Held : The State deprived petitioner due process law guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment. Under statutes, defendant is entitled fixed jury, if it had correctly instructed, less than 10 years. Thus, possibility would returned 40 years substantial, incorrect say instruction requiring imposition prison Petitioner's interest exercise jury's discretion imposing merely matter procedural law, liberty Amendment preserves against arbitrary deprivation State. And argument that, view Appeals' statutory authority revise judgments on appeal, no absolute right unpersuasive. Pp. 345-347. Vacated remanded. David M. Ebel, Denver, Colo., for petitioner. Janet L. Cox, City, Okl., respondent, pro hac vice, special leave Court. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion 1 brought charge unlawfully distributing heroin. Since felony offenses preceding years, members were accordance with then effect Oklahoma,1 they found guilty, "shall assess [the] at forty (40) imprisonment." verdict guilt mandatory term. 2 Subsequent conviction, which term case Appeals. Thigpen v. State, 571 P.2d 467, 471 (1977). On sought set aside unconstitutionality provision. acknowledged unconstitutional, nonetheless reasoning statute, since event.2 We granted certiorari consider contention him 444 963, 447, 62 374. 3 By Oklahoma, jury. Okla.Stat., Tit. 22, § 926 (1971).3 Had instructed "not ten . years." 21, 51(A)(1) (1971). thus substantial. It therefore, wholly impose 4 argued all involved denial exclusively concern. Where, however, has provided criminal correct defendant's law. substantial legitimate expectation will be only extent determined its discretion, cf. Greenholtz Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 1, 99 2100, 60 668 (1979), one See Vitek Jones, 445 480, 488-489, 1254, 1261, 63 552, citing Wolff McDonnell, 418 539, 94 2963, 41 935; supra ; Morrissey Brewer, 408 471, 92 2593, 33 484. In denied simply frail conjecture might equally as harsh mandated Such disregard law.4 5 argues, revisory Appeals, 1066 (1971) ("The Appellate may reverse, affirm or modify judgment appealed from ."). concedes fix first instance, denied. Moreover, substantially affects imposed. No cited us increased State's Assistant Attorney General indicated oral doubtful whether appellate power so. consequence, appears instance determinative, least practical matter, maximum receive. Nor did purport cure itself reconsidering appropriateness sentence.5 Rather, statute. doing so, without 6 Accordingly, vacated, remanded further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 7 So ordered. 8 REHNQUIST, dissenting. 9 concludes refusing vacate unlawful distribution That conclusion, turn, depends Court's assertion impermissibly state-created sentenced Because I believe either mischaracterizes conferred erroneously assumes right, dissent. undoubtedly does confer But true question validly imposed, federal For constitutionally afforded him. properly sentenced. If conclusion rested interpretation difficulty agreeing new sentencing principles process. fails inquire into basis court's improperly instance. central resolution issue presented case. conformity This assumption, cannot divined available cases. Those cases fact strongly indicate decision here erroneous afford opportunity resentenced correct, albeit wrong reason. 11 then, original equal protection. time designed provide sentences multiple offenders laws.* 51(A) (Supp.1977) who guilty offense punishable imprisonment excess after having imprisonment, subject ranging apparent infinity. (Oklahoma juries apparently exercised great relish, long 1,500 second-time offenders. Callins 500 1333 (Crim.App.1972)). Defendants more prior 51(B). Section 51(B) invest determine length imprisonment. Instead section formula determining instruction. scheme permitted defendants far those specified two convictions. 467 (Okla.Crim.App.1977), decided challenged constitutionality concluded potential disparate rendered "unconstitutional," struck section. 12 based Federal Constitution. indicate, Act, relied advisory submitted district judge. P.2d, n. 3. attached appendix position advocated violated Equal Protection Clause United States Constitution longer terms offense. author relies reaching determination. 13 thought protection applied well. agree. Petitioner third-time given benefit lenient provisions before Thigpen. Thus class one-time burdensome treatment member favored class, agree other rights Constitution, am unable required additional therefore Oklahoma. 1976 Okla.Sess. Laws, ch. 94, codified (Supp.1977). text 51 provided: "(A) Every person who, penitentiary, commits crime therefor follows: "1. subsequently upon penitentiary exceeding five (5) (10) "2. subsequent term, "3. petit larceny, attempt commit which, committed, "(B) offenses, third, thereafter, date following completion execution shall punished Penitentiary twenty (20) plus longest said third punishable, offense; provided, arisen out same transaction occurrence series events closely related location; further, nothing abrogate affect death crimes now hereafter made death." Legislature amended 1978 281, (Supp.1979). "Defendant asserts fourth assignment error [Okla.Stat., 21,] 51(B), sentenced, unconstitutional. laid rest Okla.Cr., must find use authorized 51(A)." Hicks F-77-751 (Mar. 8, 1979). unreported. A petition rehearing April 6, 1979. Only 927 our disposition we reach several contentions. resentence occasion requires notice hearing, including present mitigating evidence, sentencing. McGautha California, 402 183, 218-220, 91 1454, 28 711; Specht Patterson, 386 605, 606, 87 1209, 1210, 18 326. also Mempa Rhay, 389 128, 88 254, 19 336. * (Supp.1977), provides:

Category: 3