Medicine Technology 🌱 Environment Space Energy Physics Engineering Social Science Earth Science Science
Science 2011-02-20 2 min read

Lack of Jury Trial Overturns Three Strikes Sentence

An appellate court overturned a three-strikes sentence because a judge determined the sentence instead of a jury. This could impact others sentenced under California's three-strikes law.

February 20, 2011

Lack of Jury Trial Overturns Three Strikes Sentence

Rick Wilson was recently released from a California prison after serving more than 10 years of a 25-years-to-life "three strikes" sentence. The Ninth Circuit United States District Court of Appeals overturned his sentence in spite of the fact that it was upheld by other California state courts and a United States District Court. The Appeals Court decision was based on the fact that Wilson was not given the opportunity for a jury to decide the sentence given following a guilty verdict in his 1999 trial on charges of drunk driving.

What is the "Three Strikes" Law

California's three strikes law is aimed at repeat offenders convicted of felonies. The law allows for the repeat offender to face an increased sentence of up to life in prison if convicted of a third "strike offense." State law defines what crimes qualify as a strike offense.

What Happened in the Wilson Case?

Wilson received his first strike in 1993 after pleading no contest to felony-level vehicular manslaughter following an accident that killed a passenger in his vehicle and seriously injured another. Another strike came with the 1999 conviction for felony-level drunk driving -- the 1999 charge was felony-level because it comes within 10 years from another drunk driving conviction. During the sentencing phase of the 1999 trial, the judge found that Wilson actually should have received two strikes for the 1993 accident: one for vehicular manslaughter for the death of the male passenger in the car.

On appeal, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that when the judge independently assigned the second strike in the 1993 case (the one given for inflicting great bodily harm upon the female vehicle passenger), he violated Wilson's Constitutional right to a jury trial. Citing a U.S. Supreme Court decision that says defendants have a right to have a jury decide factual issues that may increase a sentence, the court said the sentencing judge decided disputed factual issues -- specifically those concerning the extent of the injuries suffered by the female passenger in Mr. Wilson's car -- that should have gone to a jury.

How Will the Wilson Case Impact Others?

The court's decision in this case could have an impact on others sentenced under the three strikes law in California and other states around the country. Defendants whose three strikes included one or more guilty pleas might have grounds to appeal their sentence, as those charges and possible defenses to them would not have been heard and decided by a jury.

Due to the harshness of California's three strikes law it is extremely important to seek the counsel of an experienced criminal defense attorney after any arrest.

Article provided by Jerrold M. Bodow Attorney at Law APLC
Visit us at www.attorneybodow.com