State v. Bement

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals held that imposing a true-life sentence for first-degree murder under ORS 163.107(2)(b) based on judicial factfinding of sentencing reasons violated the Sixth Amendment under Apprendi and Blakely. The court rejected or declined to reach the defendant's remaining assignments of error concerning alleged prosecutorial misconduct and an unruled motion. The conviction was otherwise affirmed, but the case was remanded for resentencing.

Holdings

1. A trial court violates the Sixth Amendment when it imposes an enhanced true-life sentence under ORS 163.107(2)(b) based on judicial factfinding of the reasons supporting the sentence. Enhancement facts supporting the sentence must be submitted to and found by a jury under the procedures in ORS 136.760 through 136.792.
2. Remand for resentencing, rather than an order limiting defendant to a life sentence with the possibility of parole, is the appropriate remedy because the state had alternatively requested a post-verdict jury trial on enhancement factors and the record did not establish that timely notice on remand was impossible.
3. The court rejected the assignments concerning the bloody-money evidence and the alleged prosecutorial misconduct because the arguments were undeveloped, unpreserved, or failed to comply with ORAP 5.45.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court violated the Sixth Amendment by imposing a true-life sentence under ORS 163.107(2)(b) based on judicial factfinding of the reasons supporting that sentence.
2. Whether the trial court erred by failing to dismiss the murder count or grant a mistrial after the state introduced evidence of bloody money without informing the jury that the blood did not belong to the victim.
3. Whether the trial court erred by denying or failing to rule on defendant's motion to prevent prosecutorial misconduct at retrial.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded