State v. Langston

Summary

The court held that a sentencing judge may consider conduct underlying an acquitted charge when the conduct has a minimal indicium of reliability and the resulting sentence remains within the statutory range for the offenses of conviction. This practice did not violate the defendant’s federal or state rights to due process or a jury trial, and the court declined to prohibit it through supervisory authority. The court nevertheless cautioned sentencing judges not to express or imply disagreement with the jury’s verdict; the separate-opinion field is empty because no separate opinions were issued.