Document: 524 U.S. 742118 S.Ct. 2246141 L.Ed.2d 633 Angel Jaime MONGE, Petitioner,v.CALIFORNIA. No. 97-6146. Supreme Court of the United States Argued April 28, 1998. Decided June 26, Syllabus * California's "three-strikes'' law provides, among other things, that a convicted felon with one prior conviction for serious felony-such as assault where inflicted great bodily injury or personally used dangerous deadly weapon-will have his prison term doubled. Under California law, number procedural safeguards surround assessment allegations: Defendants may invoke right to jury trial, confront witnesses, and privilege against self-incrimination; prosecution must prove allegations beyond reasonable doubt; rules evidence apply. After petitioner was on three counts violating drug laws, State sought sentence enhanced based previous resulting term. At sentencing hearing, prosecutor asserted had stick during assault, but introduced into only record showing he been weapon served offense. Finding both true, trial court, relevant here, doubled petitioner's count added 1-year enhancement On appeal, Appeal ruled insufficient trigger because were not proved doubt, remand retrial would violate double jeopardy principles. The reversed ruling, plurality holding Double Jeopardy Clause, though applicable in capital context, see Bullington v. Missouri, 451 430, 101 1852, 68 270, does extend noncapital proceedings. Held: Clause preclude allegation Pp. ____-____. (a) Historically, this has found protections inapplicable proceedings determinations at issue do place defendant an "offense.'' Nor can generally be analogized acquittal. See DiFrancesco, 449 117, 134, 426, 436, 66 328. In Bullington, established "narrow exception'' general rule principles no application context. There, after received life from original then obtained new announced its intention seek death penalty again. This imposed bar, finding first jury's deliberations bore hallmarks guilt innocence presented choice between two alternatives together standards guide their decision, establish facts separate proceeding formally resembled trial. Moreover, reasoned embarrassment, expense, ordeal, anxiety, insecurity faces are least equivalent faced by any phase criminal Bullington's since applied scheme which judge made determination impose sentence. Arizona Rumsey, 467 203, 209-210, 104 2305, 2309, 81 164. (b) rationale apply Even if those identified critical component case's reasoning many respects, trial's is continuation murder. unique severity finality, qualitative difference penalties calls greater degree reliability when it imposed. That need accords central concerns animating prohibition: preventing making repeated attempts convict, thereby enhancing possibility innocent person guilty. previously suggested confined circumstances proceeding, Caspari Bohlen, 510 383, 392, 114 948, 954-955, 127 236, cited example heightened accorded defendants, Strickland Washington, 466 668, 686-687, 2052, 2065-2066, 80 674. (c) Petitioner minimize relevance context arguing turns nature rather than consequences proceeding. holding, however, trial-like stake. Court's jurisprudence, moreover, intertwined. States' implementation matter legislative grace, constitutional command, compel extension bar. P. ____. 16 Cal.4th 826, 941 P.2d 1121, affirmed. O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., KENNEDY, THOMAS, BREYER, JJ., joined. STEVENS, filed dissenting opinion. SCALIA, opinion, SOUTER GINSBURG, David F. Glassman, Los Angeles, CA, respondent. Matthew D. Roberts, DC, amicus curiae, special leave Court. Justice O'CONNOR 1 case presents question whether we 270 (1981), extends We hold not, accordingly affirm judgment 2 charged under using minor sell marijuana, Cal. Health & Safety Code Ann. §11361(a) (West 1991), sale transportation §11360(a), possession marijuana sale, §11359. information, also notified offense, Cal.Penal §§245(a)(1), 667(e)(1), 667.5 Supp.1998). 3 felony who qualifying convictions "serious felonies'' receives minimum 25 years life; instant preceded court doubles defendant's imprisonment. §§667(d)(1) (e)(1)-(2). An qualifies either another assault. §§1192.7(c)(8) (23). According See, e.g., 833-834, 1126 (1997). 4 Here, waived issues, granted motion bifurcate entered guilty verdict substantive offenses, truth argued before court. committing Tr. 189-190 (June 12, 1995), App. demonstrating People's Exh. (filed 3-6. true 11-year imprisonment: 5 one, 10 three-strikes stayed 3-year ordered 2-year concurrently. appealed, Appeal, own motion, requested briefing sufficient supported conviction. conceded did contain proof doubt weapon, opportunity remand. Respondent's Supplemental Brief (Cal.App.), pp. 2-3, 33-35. determined 6 Appeal's ruling bars allegations. three-justice noted traditional reluctance concluded exception recognized supra, held "the [a] innocence'' could resentenced upon following appeal. acknowledged assess distinguishable several grounds. First, statements indicating cases. Cal.4th, 836-837, P.2d, 1128 (citing 236 (1994); Pennsylvania Goldhammer, 474 30, 106 353, 354, 88 183 (1985) (per curiam)). procedures mandated interpretation Federal Constitution, whereas rest statutory 837, 1128. breadth subjectivity factual well financial emotional burden places defendant. Id., 838-839, 1129. Finally, explained strike involves particular "status'' conviction, while "depends specific present crime, overall character.'' 839, 1130. 7 concurring justice provided fourth vote reverse require factfinder reevaluate underlying Accordingly, second attempt proving unfairly subject risk within meaning Clause. 846-847, 1134-1135 (Brown, concurring). Three justices dissented, asserting rationale, precludes successive efforts 847, Cal.Rptr.2d, 866, 1135 (Werdegar, dissenting). 8 decision deepened conflict state courts sentencing. Compare, Hennings, 100 Wash.2d 379, 670 256 (1983), People Levin, 157 Ill.2d 138, 191 Ill.Dec. 72, 623 N.E.2d 317 (1993). Prior nonretroactivity Teague Lane, 489 288, 109 1060, 103 334 (1989), bar federal habeas review, Caspari, Courts Appeals reached disparate conclusions well. Briggs Procunier, 764 F.2d 368, 371 (C.A.5 1985), Carpenter Chapleau, 72 F.3d 1269, 1274 (C.A.6), cert. denied, --- ----, 117 108, 136 61 (1996). view conflicting authority issue, certiorari, 522 118 751, 139 750 (1998). II 9 Fifth Amendment, through Fourteenth provides: " [N]or shall same offence twice put limb.'' Const., Amdt. 5. protects prosecutions offense acquittal multiple punishments North Carolina Pearce, 395 711, 717, 89 2072, 2076, 23 656 (1969). proceedings, 438, S.Ct., 1857-1858, "offense,'' see, Nichols States, 511 738, 747, 1921, 1927, 128 745 (1994) (noting repeat-offender laws ""penaliz[e] last committed defendant'''). enhancements construed additional punishment offense; rather, they act increase "because manner [the defendant] crime conviction.'' Watts, 519 148, 154, 633, 636, 554 (1997); Witte 515 389, 398-399, 115 2199, 2205-2206, 132 351 (1995). persistent offender thus "is viewed earlier crimes'' "a stiffened latest considered aggravated repetitive one.'' Gryger Burke, 728, 732, 1256, 1258, 92 L.Ed. 1683 (1948); cf. Moore 159 673, 678, 179, 181, 40 301 (1895) (" [T]he undoubtedly provide persons suffer severer subsequent offences offence''). SCALIA insists recidivism confronts here fact constitutes element His dissent addresses neither nor discussed brief event, acknowledges, post, __-__, argument squarely foreclosed our Almendarez-Torres 523 1219, 140 350 One imagine fundamental fairness treated __ (SCALIA, dissenting), there cases defining factor. A might example, wish simultaneously profess dispute amount drugs allegedly involved. Cf. Gregg Georgia, 428 153, 190-195, 96 2909, 2933-2936, 49 859 (1976) (joint Stewart, Powell, JJ.) (discussing benefits bifurcated cases). part reason, rejected absolute time increases maximum exposed. Almendarez-Torres, supra. uses seven years, 14 felony. 1991). falls range constitutionally permissible. supra (upholding potential 18-year sentence). Thus, 11 Sentencing decisions favorable defendant, cannot appeals overturns ground proffered guilt, comparable acquittal, Burks 437 1, 16, 98 2141, 2150, 57 (1978). Where similar failure occurs analogy inapt. pronouncement simply "have qualities finality attend acquittal.'' 328 (1980); U.S., 1857 ("The imposition usually regarded "acquittal' more severe imposed''). 12 "does know moment what exact limit will turn out be.'' 137, 437. Consequently, "well-established jurisprudence'' guarantee prevents seeking review restricts length successful id., 135, 436; 720, 2078; Stroud 251 15, 18, 50, 51, 64 (1919) (despite harsher retrial, "placed Constitution''). 13 Our Schiro Farley, 222, 231, 783, 790, 47 (1994). imprisonment jury. subsequently permitted prospective women jurors claim automatic exemption service violation Sixth Amendments. 1856-1857. When again, alleged violation. "hallmarks innocence,'' 439, 1858, undertook establishing 1858. light binary protections, distinct sentencing, "it impossible conclude less "constitute[s] effect government failed case.''' 443, 1860 (quoting Burks, 2149). "embarrassment, expense ordeal'' "anxiety insecurity'' "are trial.'' 445, 1861. And "unacceptably high risk'' persuade lead erroneous 445-446, 1861-1862. later extended set forth judge, opposed jury, initially appropriate. 164 (1984). 15 contends imposing Rumsey applies equal force determine allegation. Like Missouri argues, sentencer makes objective historical doubt. distinguished, maintains, normative typical view, once such should retry assuming, "hallmarks'' undertaken gravity warrants ultimate punishment; respects "It vital importance'' "be, appear be, reason caprice emotion.'' Gardner Florida, 430 349, 358, 97 1197, 1204, 51 393 (1977). Because "in finality,'' 357, acute Lockett Ohio, 438 586, 604, 2954, 2964, 973 (1978) (opinion Burger, C.J.) (stating "qualitative imposed''); 704, 2073, 674 (1984) (Brennan, part) [W]e consistently required policed all stages especially vigilant concern accuracy factfinding''). 17 prohibition jeopardy. As Green 355 184, 78 221, 199 (1957), "mak[ing] convict individual subjecting him ordeal compelling live continuing anxiety insecurity, even guilty.'' 187-188, 223. Indeed, interest itself. ""the interests [are] magnitude . protected designed exclude nearly possible likelihood judgment.''' 441, 1859 Addington Texas, 441 418, 423-424, 99 1804, 1807-1808, 60 323 (1979)). 18 "unique proceeding.'' 954; 353-354 "clearly sentenc[ing case] acquittal''') 436). addition, defendants. Strickland, 2064 ("A sufficiently like adversarial format existence [Bullington], counsel's role trial''). 19 argues For notes overrule (1919)-which proceeding-but distinguished bear innocence. predates Furman 408 238, 2726, 33 346 (1972) curiam), JJ.); decided "no significant lesser expressly Court.'' Gardner, 1204 J.). resemble confronted different case. focused absence distinguishing mean rests purely rationale. 20 respect humanity Eighth Amendment requires consideration character indispensable process inflicting death.'' Woodson Carolina, 280, 304, 2978, 2991, 944 (internal citation omitted). command. Many chosen implement protect defendants face dramatic sentences result enhancements. believe done so, compelled create disincentives diminish these important protections. 21 22 It so ordered. 24 dissenting. "The forbids purpose affording supply muster 11, 2147, (1978).1 Today, ignores cardinal principal. case, attempted If fact, automatically sentenced prison.2 prosecution, case.3 prohibits ""second bite apple.''' 17, 2150. 26 Until today, never resentencing permissible insufficient; instead, drawn line insufficiency legal errors infect proceeding.4 unanimous Chief Burger emphasized difference, i.e., "between reversals due error evidentiary insufficiency.'' 2149. He specifically "that make distinction contributed substantially conceptual confusion existing area law,'' ibid., order hold, did, reviewing legally insufficient,'' necessary cases, 2150-2151. today reflects recognize importance distinction. 27 I agree "implement enhancements,'' ante, __, obligation otherwise exist. But so-not just recently, years5 -is powerful responding understanding produced re Winship, 397 90 1068, 368 (1970),6 Mullaney Wilbur, 421 684, 95 1881, 44 508 (1975).7 fairness-dating back centuries common plea autrefois acquit buttressed finality-that undergirds Clause.8 28 respectfully dissent. 29 whom GINSBURG join, 30 extended, conclusion assumption here. 31 guarantees Bill Rights, sense backdrop Anglo-American law. tradition, "offence[s].'' "offence'' composed "elements,'' components submitted (if desires) Conviction renders eligible punishments, (judge jury) selects most often considers issues much demanding requirements stage. elements go provides foundation entire jurisprudence-including "same elements'' test determining "offence[s]'' same,'' Blockburger 284 299, 52 180, 76 306 (1932), (at here) expectation sentences. delimits boundaries rights, 32 (as seems assume) label affixed each legislature. Suppose repealed violent crimes code replaced them "knowingly causing another,'' bearing days prison, series "sentencing enhancements'' authorizing up basis various levels mens rea, injury, surrounding circumstances. Could grant requirement solely cause[d] preponderance acted intentionally accidentally, victim ultimately died inflicted? Rights easily circumvented, borrow phrase Field, "vain idle enactment[s], accomplished nothing, unnecessarily excited Congress people [their] passage.'' Slaughter-House Cases, 83 36, Wall. 96, 394 (1872).1 Although system sinister, takes steps down road. full look exactly crimes, expose punishment. §12022.5 (1982) typical: [A]ny firearm commission punished three, four, five years.'' Compare provision counterpart, U.S.C. §924(c)(1), [w]hoever, relation violence trafficking carries firearm, shall, addition Everyone agrees §924(c)(1) describes entitling accompany convictions. undisputed combined mistaken consisted of, created considerable juridical chaos recent years. Bailey 516 116 501, 133 472 (1995); Bousley Brooks, 682, 630 Perhaps taken lesson Legislature, my worst fears about today's justified) stumbled El Dorado vain beginning Republic: means dispensing inconvenient "rights.'' now, gimmick eviscerate Clause; still notice, "enhancement'' withdrawn tomorrow. 34 Earlier Term, (1998), precedents grave doubtful Constitution permits exposed ---------, 1238-1239 (dissenting opinion). stopped short answering question, thought doctrine us interpret statute setting enhancement, avoiding problem. Ibid. Since already authoritatively now answer question. Monge eleven "sentence allegations.'' However chooses divide code, purposes extra four attributable crime.2 functionally acquitted adduced sustain court's findings, 2150-2151, Giving chance very core prohibition. 35 disposition contradict, course, "recidivism'' findings affecting rights. note, left open "enhancements'' involve history valid. qualification implicit limitation today. 36 syllabus prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Timber Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. also, Poland Arizona, 476 147, 152, 1749, 1753, 123 (1986) (reprosecution prohibited whenever appellate decides case'' quotation marks omitted)); 231-232, entitled "one fair opportunity' prosecute phase, ensuing proceeding''). increased range. then, factually 386-387, 951-952, (1994), respondent's affect [t]here [petitioner] suffered conviction'' 41 (emphasis immaterial, 2147. concedes insufficient. Poland, 1754 [The Court] clearly indicated remarking mistook find [satisfied disputed aggravator].'''); 141, 439-440, (1980) specifies abused discretion employed unlawful findings. empowered correct error'' added)); Bozza 330 160, 166-167, 67 645, 649, 91 818 (1947) (error infects corrected appeal). Annot., 58 A.L.R. 59-62 (1929); _________, 1236-1237, dissenting); ("Many enhancements''). despite impliedly commanded Constitution,'' 377, 1079 (Black, standard dated "at early Nation,'' 361, 1071, justified Due Process accused except every constitute charged,'' 364, 1073. Mullaney, unanimously protection Winship innocence, 697-698, 1888-1889; 1234-1235 accurately characterizes "sinister.'' Post, __. steps'' road follows McMillan Pennsylvania, 477 79, 2411, (1986). suggests "fundamental fairness'' sometimes call treating factor element, exposure, involved.'' Ante, agreed putting fundamentally unfair, assume eager pursue strategy cost forfeiting rights contemplate Faustian bargains. simultaneous genuinely prejudicial (as, history), without sacrificing factfinding phase. 1239-1240, 1243, (1998) "was reconsideration explicitly contend reality charged, fairly included make. "When properly limited theories advanced parties, retains independent power identify proper construction governing law.'' Kamen Kemper Financial Services, Inc., 500 90, 99, 111 1711, 1718, 152 (1991). Nat. Bank Ore. Independent Ins. Agents America, 446, 113 2173, 2178, 124 402

Category: 1