Nguyen

People v. Nguyen

Good Law
146 Cal. App. 4th 1332·54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 535
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 2007H028798California13,477 words

Opinion

Opinion

McADAMS, J.

The sole issue in this appeal is whether it is constitutional to use juvenile adjudications to increase the maximum punishment for an offense, in light of the United States Supreme Court's opinions in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 ( Apprendi ) and Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 ( Blakely ). In concluding that it is not, we respectfully disagree with our colleagues on this court and others, and join the small but growing number of courts across the country that have likewise concluded that Apprendi and its progeny compel us to recognize that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial is an integral part of the process that is due before a prior conviction may be used to increase the maximum sentence for a criminal offense. However, because defendant's juvenile adjudication is based on his admission in juvenile court, his sentence is not affected by our holding today, and the judgment is affirmed.

In December 2004 a complaint was filed charging 21-year-old defendant Nguyen with four felony counts: possession of a firearm by a felon; possession of ammunition by a felon,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.