The State of Washington v. Daniel D. Hughes, Appellant the State of Washington v. George Leonard Selvidge…

Summary

The court held that Washington’s exceptional-sentencing statutes are facially constitutional, but the exceptional sentences imposed on Anderson, Selvidge, and Hughes violated the Sixth Amendment because judges found aggravating facts that were not found by juries. It further held that such violations cannot be reviewed for harmless error and that courts may not create a jury-sentencing procedure absent legislative authorization, requiring standard-range resentencing. The court affirmed Hughes’s theft conviction and restitution order, but declined to review his unpreserved allocution claim. Justice Sanders, concurring, agreed with the disposition while observing that a more developed challenge to the restitution evidence might have presented a reviewable issue.