Opinion ID: 2546378
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Did Imposition of the Firearm Enhancement Violate Recuenco's Sixth Amendment Jury Trial Right as Defined by Blakely?

Text: ¶ 10 The jury did not explicitly find beyond a reasonable doubt that Recuenco committed assault with a firearm; it found only the use of a deadly weapon. Without an explicit firearm finding by the jury, the court's imposition of a firearm sentence enhancement violated Recuenco's jury trial right as defined by Apprendi and Blakely  Recuenco's sentence was greater than that allowed solely based on the facts found by the jury. [2] The State concedes the existence of a Blakely Sixth Amendment violation, stating that its previous argument that the judge's imposition of the firearm enhancement was not subject to Apprendi was no longer tenable following Blakely and that Recuenco was entitled to a jury finding that he was armed with a firearm. Resp't's Supp. Br. at 7-8, 10-11. But the State argues the violation does not require vacation of his sentence because (1) Recuenco invited the error by proposing the special verdict form he now challenges and (2) the error was harmless.