From an editorial Monday in the Los Angeles Times:
Legal scholars long have struggled to determine the proper allocation of authority between judges and juries. But you dont have to be an expert to recognize that Allen Ryan Alleyne was treated unjustly by a federal court in Virginia.
The jury that convicted Alleyne for his role in the armed robbery of a convenience store specifically looked at the question of whether a gun was brandished by Alleynes accomplice, a factor that would trigger a mandatory minimum sentence of seven years for any participant in the crime. The jury concluded that it wasnt (although it did agree that a gun had been used or carried). But when the judge sentenced Alleyne, he concluded that a gun had been brandished and sentenced him to the mandatory minimum.
Last week, Alleynes lawyers asked the Supreme Court to set aside that sentence, but they acknowledged that to do so, the court must overturn its 2002 decision in Harris v. U.S., which allowed judges to determine whether a weapon was brandished.
As a general rule, the court should be cautious about overturning its own precedents. But the Harris decision, a 5-4 ruling, was logically at odds with a landmark ruling handed down two years earlier, Apprendi vs. New Jersey. Overturning Harris would do more than provide relief for Alleyne; it would also clarify that juries, not judges, are responsible for deciding whether a defendant committed a crime.
The Apprendi case concerned a man who fired shots into the home of a neighbor. A judge had added two years to Charles Apprendi Jr.s maximum sentence of 10 years after finding that the shooting was racially motivated. But the court ruled that the question of motivation should have been presented to a jury.
The Apprendi ruling didnt give juries total authority over sentencing. Judges may adjust sentences based on a range of factors, including a defendants prior criminal record. In other words, they may decide whether a punishment fits the criminal as well as the crime. But whether a crime was committed is for the jury, not the judge, to determine.
The Charlotte Observer welcomes your comments on news of the day. The more voices engaged in conversation, the better for us all, but do keep it civil. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views.
Have a news tip? You can send it to a local news editor; email email@example.com to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Charlotte Observer.Read moreRead less