David Leon Stokes, II v. Dora B. Schriro, Director

Good Law
465 F.3d 397·2006 WL 2846370·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 25027
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 6, 200604-16454California2,967 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rawlinson, J.

A jury found David Leon Stokes, II (Stokes) guilty of attempted kidnapping and attempted robbery in Arizona state court. The jury also found the offenses to be “dangerous.” At sentencing, the trial judge opted to sentence Stokes to twenty years as a repetitive offender whose previous convictions were for non-dangerous offenses. The judge then enhanced the sentence to twenty-five years by finding aggravating circumstances. After Stokes’s habeas petition was denied in district court, we granted a certificate of ap-pealability (COA) on the issue of whether Stokes “was sentenced in violation of the Sixth Amendment pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because the trial court disregarded the jury’s findings of dangerousness and sentenced appellant as a non-dangerous repetitive offender.” We conclude that the trial court’s election of one statutory sentencing option over another was not contrary to Apprendi . However, the court ran afoul of Apprendi when it relied on judicial factfinding to increase Stokes’s sentence beyond the statutory maximum. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

I

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL…

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.