Washington Supreme Court
State v. Hughes
April 14, 2005154 Wash. 2d 118
Summary
The court held that Washington's exceptional-sentencing statutes remain facially constitutional because they can be applied when aggravating facts are stipulated to, waived, or found by a jury. The exceptional sentences imposed on all three petitioners violated the Sixth Amendment because judges found aggravating facts beyond prior convictions, and those violations could not be deemed harmless. The court therefore remanded for standard-range sentences, while affirming Hughes's conviction and restitution order.