WPCM &$o:PRt kwj>z[eLJ\[+)1%+4}8"$5uH~.^q2~O!F8 zH yz$HG߯2ɠw)=[qs;Ts׳5.m6rpc5Wt3;(G͠ݠ^1rf"JD0;)C/ػ̓xr VCCȒDƨxӏwJ DRCe0o+P /*gS$8U{s&pc!Ry(K O^x9mΏv^ <) 0CR> 1u> 0 ?E @ 72 @ 72>@ Np@d@w"AU@@&A&fA 0 H 0f>I 0wI 0J 0J 0K^ LL mL 0}L4NM bMwM -M 0MUNCN$N  N 1N YOtOR 0S  T  T jT "UUwU 0DVRVUNVc5W  ^ ^  ^ 0^_6` d e =eTOe nf jg j{g g h f!h 0h 09i jQj no pris HBttbDu jJuU>u 0u rv&2w jXx jx j,y 0y 0Oz 0{ 0{ 0| j8} j}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}} 1 ~ ~n~~ Bp 1u  =[.5(r$        ;m;;m;mV& 8Document[8]Document Style0..8` ..` V8Document[4]Document Style.. . V 8Document[6]Document Style8..V 8Document[5]Document Style0..V/8Document[2]Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   V& 8Document[7]Document Style0..0` ..` zU :Right Par[1]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..2I.3  Ԁ..0..zh :Right Par[2]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..2A.3  Ԁ..0` ..` V?8Document[3]Document Style.. 21.3  Ԁ   z{ :Right Par[3]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  ..P 21.3  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. z :Right Par[4]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. .. 2a.3  Ԁ .. 0..z :Right Par[5]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..2(1)3  Ԁ..0h..hz :Right Par[6]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..2(a)3  Ԁh..h0..z :Right Par[7]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....2i)3  Ԁ..0..z :Right Par[8]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..2a)3  Ԁ..0p..pVX8Document[1]Document Style  @..^  2I.3  Ԁ     Ԉ l2:Technical[5]Technical Document Style.. 2(1)3  Ԁ. l2:Technical[6]Technical Document Style.. 2(a)3  Ԁ. l/%:Technical[2]Technical Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   .. l,!:Technical[3]Technical Document Style 21.3  Ԁ   .. l(!:Technical[4]Technical Document Style 2a.3  Ԁ   .. l:0:Technical[1]Technical Document Style  2I.3  Ԁ     .. l1:Technical[7]Technical Document Style.. 2i)3  Ԁ. l1:Technical[8]Technical Document Style.. 2a)3  Ԁ. R& 8BibliogrphyBibliography0....fp2Doc InitInitialize Document StyleS "     I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)S !(e$8 `  (,Ug$0 ` 8 ` `  ` (@$0 ` 0 ` ` 8     A_ekqwDocumentDocument StyleI.1.A.a.(1)(a)i)a)jo4Tech InitInitialize Technical StyleS $  1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 S CuyTechnicalTechnical Document Style11.11.1.11.1.1.11.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1x?t2PleadingHeader for numbered pleading paper '(2|$ r!        ;m[;m;m   + &Ȥ(    X  C O $#C  +3XXXXXX?5'*dE*??5'*dE*?HH1HH2HH3HH4HH5HH6HH7HH8HH910111213141516171819202122232425262728  .+:SupremeCourtFormat for Printed Supreme Court Brief ! y379;=?AGM1.a.1)(2|$ r!        ;m[;m;m  <6X9`(Courier !.Constitutional Provisions($HP LaserJet 1200 Series PCL 60)a)($    7#137=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(!2Q$ r!        ;m[;m;m  Ӏ  0  3i)i)9C:\AMERIC~1.0\DOWNLOAD\APPELL~1.WPTC:\America Online 6.0\download\AppellateBrief.wpt(9 Z(Times New Roman  Knutsen PXT h]isr]ubbingtouchings i]tspecifitythat thatt]his t]heCheriseoffense[sEcclestonGalazat]alk[ingConatserJacoboWollersheimScientologyMRKINCADEFalsettadecisisTriggsCudjoHubbardkidnappingv]ariousJammal Kamp MakBlodgettStansburyp]unishmenti]nsofarLatimer HoeyBeamon i]nA]lthoughArbelaezcuriamnonconfrontedCarmy s]opee peewen[tDarroneTrevalaundromatVarley h]ereprosecuted n]otWaplest]ouchingtimeframeSheyenneDoeLiebersteink]indreally reallyj]ustMcKinneyharbor[ede]videnceBalcommisassumptiont]hereNetherlyDarryealEvid.CodeO]nceenvironment[sprovide[ddeclarantRubikMariahiBroditCal.AppSheyenneSPIERSBLAKELYApprendiw]ithoutD.A.R.MARCHIANO U.Snonjury L.Ed(u՘$2  I  .3  0 4 (W$ @*   A (O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(#0 U(TT$0 4 0 4(#4(#0 (# (#0< (# (# z0`r.Cases3|x.Other Authorities(hJ$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#  6Times New Roman Regular   .1=====@AB$y;ciou{BriefHeadings for BriefsI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a).Statutes   ' (Gordon Brownell(0Gordon Brownell .     4Q$      ;m[;m;mӀ  4    _ԀAllsubsequentreferencesto RTrefertotheReportersTranscript  ofProceedingsonMarch28,2003,ascontainedinVolume27ofthe  reporterstranscriptsandrecordonappeal.(3+W$ r!        ;m[;m;m    0  ..6.7Blakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decideXsection 11705 S!    ;q[;q;q  _section1170($$  0   S!    ;q[;q;q  _rule4.420(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular Y 4Q$      ;m[;m;mӀ  1    _ԀRule4.420 ^ ԀoftheCaliforniaRulesofCourtprovidesinpertinentpart,  withitalicsadded:  0 `   ` (a)...Themiddletermshallbeselectedunlessimpositionofthe  upperorlowertermisjustifiedbycircumstancesinaggravationor  mitigation ` `  0 ` (b)Circumstancesinaggravationshallbeestablishedbya   preponderanceoftheevidence.Selectionoftheuppertermis   justifiedonlyif,afteraconsiderationofalltherelevantfacts,the   circumstancesinaggravationoutweighthecircumstancesin   mitigation.Therelevantfactsareincludedinthecaserecord,the   probationofficer'sreport,otherreportsandstatementsproperly   received,statementsinaggravationormitigation,andanyfurther   evidenceintroducedatthesentencinghearing.... ` `  0 ` (d)Afactthatisanelementofthecrimeshallnotbeusedtoimpose  theupperterm.` `  0 ` (e)Thereasonsforselectingtheupperorlowertermshallbestated  orallyontherecord,andshallincludeaconcisestatementofthe  ultimatefactswhichthecourtdeemedtoconstitutecircumstancesin  aggravationormitigationjustifyingthetermselected.[Emphasis  added].3rule 4.420asection 6695*AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5   S!    ;q[;q;q  _section669  4Q$      ;m[;m;mӀ  2    _ ` PenalCodesection669providesinpertinentpart:   ` Whenanypersonisconvictedof% c %cbtwoormorecrimes,whetherin  thesameproceedingorcourtorindifferentproceedingsorcourts,and  whetherbyjudgmentrenderedbythesamejudgeorbydifferentjudges,the  secondorothersubsequentjudgmentuponwhichsentenceisorderedtobe   executedshalldirectwhetherthetermsofimprisonmentoranyofthemto   whichheorsheissentencedshallrunconcurrentlyorconsecutively.....   .Uponthefailureofthecourttodeterminehowthetermsofimprisonment   onthesecondorsubsequentjudgmentshallrun,thetermofimprisonment   onthesecondorsubsequentjudgmentshall% d %dvrunconcurrently.."SearchTermSDU_3.Court Rulesal Provisions J r!    ;m[;m;m  _Apprendiv.NewJersey(2000)530U.S.466    [120_S.Ct_.2348,147_L.Ed_.2d435]fApprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 490[121Blakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decideBlakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decideZrule 4.4206orule 4.4256Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, 490[120AA.Normal  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5 S!    ;[;;  _rule4.425 G 4Q$      ;m[;m;mӀ  3    _ ` CaliforniaRulesofCourt,rule4.425.states:  0 ` "Criteriaaffectingthedecisiontoimposeconsecutiveratherthan  concurrentsentencesinclude:% q %q` `   "(a)[Criteriarelatingtocrimes]Factsrelatingtothecrimes,including   whetherornot:    "(1)Thecrimesandtheirobjectiveswerepredominantlyindependentof   eachother.   "(2)Thecrimesinvolvedseparateactsofviolenceorthreatsofviolence.   "(3)Thecrimeswerecommittedatdifferenttimesorseparateplaces,rather   thanbeingcommittedsocloselyintimeandplaceastoindicateasingle   periodofaberrantbehavior."SDU_49  4Q$      ;m[;m;mӀ  5    _ ` EventheWallStreetJournalnotedthattheBlakelydecisioncouldbe  a bombshellaffectingthefederalsentencingguidelinesandthe  sentencingschemesofatleasteightstates.( s  SupremeCourtLimitsScope  ofJudgesSentencingPowersWallStreetJournal,June25,2004,p.A3.)  QuotingFrankOBowmanasentencingexpertattheUniversityofIndiana  lawschool,theJournalnoted ThisisthebiggestopinioninAmerican   criminallawin25yearsbecausewecouldbeinvalidatingsignificant   componentsofmostofthesentencingstatutesintheunion.(Ibid)t Supreme Court Limits Scope of Judges Sentencing P7 !USUS.,  _ SupremeCourtLimitsScopeofJudgesSentencingPowers    WallStreetJournal,June25,2004vFairbank (1997) 16 Cal.4th 12233 S!    ;[;;  _Peoplev.Fairbank(1997)16Cal.4th122311Blakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decide\  `&Times New Roman(3n$ r!        ;m[;m;m  |Blakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decide1  r!    ;m[;m;m  _Blakelyv.Washington(2004,_D.J.D.A.R._Ԁ7581,decidedJune24,2004;    2004WL1402697Blakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decideBlakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decideBlakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decidefS':Marty's Le01for paragraph numbers   ` 2 e  0  .3   f_:Marty's Le02for paragraph numbers   `  2 e  a  .3    fj:Marty's Le03for paragraph numbers   `    2 e   .3   h (xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#Blakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decideBlakely v. Washington (2004, D.J.D.A.R. 7581, decide  CRight ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<6X9`(CourierXx6X@`7X@ d3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)H.Constitutions Provisions r!        ;m[;m;m  _% t  O=====@AB(y43 =  M   Brief:0 @ PetitionforRehearing  BlakelyIssue(s) :0 @ DenialofJuryTrialon(1) AggravatingFactors Usedto   ImposedUpperTerm(Non-RecidivistAggravatingFactors_only);_Ԁ(2)facts   usedtoimpose consecutivesentences .   Blakelyissueraisedforfirsttimeinpetitionforrehearingincourtofappeal   ProceedingBelow:GuiltyPlea   ---------------------   Posted:7/13/04  Peoplev.Wilson,A102205,Div.1  ;XX;myXXX;XPanelAtty:Gordon_Brownell_  s  = M M M   ` #ymXyX#DefendantandappellantDarryealWoodrowWilson.respectfully  requeststhatthiscourtgrantanewhearing#;mym<#ym;mintheaboveentitledcasefor 0 thereasonssetforthinthispetition.Thiscourtfileditsopinion,nottobe  publishedintheofficialreportsonJune22,2004.Petitionerissubmitting 0  thispetitionwithin15daysofthatdate,pursuanttorule25,subdivision(b),   oftheCaliforniaRulesofCourt. 0    ` #;mym#[m;mAppellantpetitionsthiscourtforarehearingbecauseoftherecent   decisionin_ { _Blakelyv.Washington(2004)542U.S____,DailyJournal 0  .D.A.R.7581,2004WL1402697)whichwasdecidedonJune24,2004,   andwhichrendersunconstitutionalasignificantportionofCalifornias 0  determinatesentencinglawandthesentenceappellantreceivedinthiscase.  Forthisreason,appellantasksthiscourttovacatetheopinionfiledonJune 0 22,2004andpermitsupplementalbriefingonthisissueoffundamental  constitutionalsignificance. 0 #;m[m#[m;m  REASONSFORGRANTINGREHEARING @@*     I.8 ` AFTERTHISCOURTISSUEDITSOPINIONONJUNE  22,2004,THEUNITEDSTATESSUPREMECOURT  DECIDEDBLAKELYV.WASHINGTONWHICH   RENDERSUNCONSTITUTIONALTHESTATUTORY ! METHODUSEDBYTRIALJUDGESTOIMPOSEBOTH " UPPERTERMSANDCONSECUTIVESENTENCES.  # THISDECISIONCLEARLYDEMONSTRATESTHAT !$ APPELLANTWASDENIEDHISRIGHTTOAJURY "% TRIALUNDERTHESIXTHAMENDMENTOFTHE #& UNITEDSTATESCONSTITUTIONANDTHISISSUE $' SHOULDBEADDRESSEDBYTHISCOURTTHROUGH % ( AGRANTOFREHEARING#;m[mA #[m;m.#;m[m#[m;m&!)` x` x  ` A.0 TheBlakelyDecision.(#+    ӀInBlakelyv.Washington,542U.S.___,2004WL1402697,the *%- defendantpleadedguiltytokidnapinghisestrangedwife.Thefactsadmitted ,b'/ inhispleasupportedamaximumsentenceof53months.Afteraseparate -(1 (nonjury)sentencinghearingontheaggravatingfactors,thetrialjudgefound  thatthedefendantactedwith deliberatecruelty.Basedonthataggravating 0 factor,thejudgeimposedatotalsentenceof90months.(Blakel h y,supra,2004  WL1402697at*4.) 0  m  S S mR  Ӏ#;m[m#[m;mӀ ` Ina54decisionrenderedtwodaysafterthiscourtissueditsdecision  S inthecaseatbar#;m[m#[m;m,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtreversedthedecisionby    theWashingtonCourtofAppealswhichhadupheldthejudgmentinBlakely.. S  (Blakel  y,supra,2004WL1402697at*4,10.)#;m[m#[m;mRelyinguponitsprior   decisionin_ g _Apprendiv.NewJersey(2000)530U.S.466,490[120_S.Ct_.2348, S  147_L.Ed_.2d435],thehighcourtheldthatthejudgecouldnotincreasea /  sentencebaseduponhisfindingof deliberatecruelty,eventhoughthe  sentencemetedoutdidnotexceedthestatutorymaximumforthattypeof / offense.(_Blakel_ i y,supra,2004WL1402697at*46.)mR݌  Ќ?+ ` hp x X?   m  S/mt  Ӏ#;m[m#[m;mԀTheBlakelycourtmadeclearthatApprendiandtheSixthAmendment  oftheUnitedStatesConstitutionrequirethatanysuchsentenceenhancement R mustbeprovedbeyondareasonabledoubtandfoundtobetruebyajury.   ThiscaserequiresustoapplytheruleweexpressedinApprendiv.New R  Jersey[supra#;m[m#ym;m530U.S.466,490]#;mym#ym;m:Otherthanthefactofapriorconviction, " anyfactthatincreasesthepenaltyforacrimebeyondtheprescribedstatutory  R$ maximummustbesubmittedtoajury,andprovedbeyondareasonable !& doubt.#;mym7#[m;mԀ(_Blakel_  y,supra,2004WL1402697at*4.)#;m[m#[m;mmt݌ #R( Ќ?+ ` hp x X?    ` Inordertoclarifywhatitmeantbythemaximumsentenceajudge $* couldaward,thecourtdefinedthe"statutorymaximum"as"themaximum &R!, sentenceajudgemayimposesolelyonthebasisofthefactsreflectedinthe '". juryverdictoradmittedbythedefendant."(_Blakel_ } y,supra,2004WL1402697 )R$0 at*4;italicsinoriginal.)#;m[m8#[m;mԀ"Inotherwords,therelevant'statutorymaximum' *%2 isnotthemaximumsentenceajudgemayimposeafterfindingadditionalfacts ,R'4 [tosupportasentenceenhancement],butthemaximumhemayimpose -(6 _withoutanyadditionalfindings.Whenajudgeinflictspunishmentthatthe  jury'sverdictalonedoesnotallow,thejuryhasnotfoundallthefacts'which 0 thelawmakesessentialtothepunishment,'[citation],andthejudgeexceeds  hisproperauthority."(Ibid.,. V italicsinoriginal.) 0   ` ThefivejusticemajoritygroundeditsopinionsquarelyupontheSixth   Amendmentrighttojurytrial.Themajorityobservedthat,"theveryreason 0   theFramersputajurytrialguaranteeintheConstitutionisthattheywere   unwillingtotrustthegovernmenttomarkouttheroleofthejury."Thecourt 0  describedtheSixthAmendment"byitsterms[as]notalimitationonjudicial   power,butareservationofjurypower.(Blakel ~ y,supra,2004WL1402697 0  at*7.)#;m[m#[m;m   ` Inessencetherefore,ifthejudgeispermittedtouseaggravatingfactors 0 toincreaseasentence,thosefactorsmustbepresentedtothejuryforits  consideration.Ifthejurydoesnotfindunanimouslyandbeyondareasonable 0 doubtthatthosefactorsexist,thejudgemaynotusethemtoincreasea  sentence.(Blakel  y,supra,2004WL1402697at*45.)#;m[m6%#[m;m 0  ` Uponapplicationoftheseprinciplestothecasebeforethiscourt,   appellantssentencewasimposedinviolationofhisSixthAmendmentright 0" tohaveajurydecidethatthefactorsrelieduponbythetrialjudgeinimposing $ consecutiveuppertermssentenceswerenotfoundtruebeyondareasonable 0!& doubt. "( #;m[ma'#[m;m    ` B.0 CaliforniaDeterminateSentencingLaw.  )0$*   `    1.0  UpperTerms  &*.% ,    ` #;m[m^)#ԀPenalCodesection1170,subdivision(b),providesinpertinentpart: 3'". 8 ` Whenajudgmentofimprisonmentistobeimposedandthe ($0 statutespecifiesthreepossibleterms,thecourtshallorder )%1 impositionofthemiddletermunlesstherearecircumstancesin *&2 aggravationormitigationofthecrime.....Indetermining +'3 whethertherearecircumstancesthatjustifyimpositionofthe ,(4 upperorlowerterm,thecourtmayconsidertherecordinthe -)5 case,theprobationofficer'sreport,otherreports...and  statementsinaggravationormitigationsubmittedbythe  prosecution,thedefendant,orthevictim,orthefamilyofthe  victimifthevictimisdeceased,andanyfurtherevidence  introducedatthesentencinghearing.Thecourtshallsetforthon  therecordthefactsandreasonsforimposingtheupperorlower   term....[m;m ` x` x + ` ThefactorssetforthinPenalCode W section1170andtheimplementing    j rule4.420oftheCaliforniaRulesofCourt\ 2  1      ׀violatetheApprendi l ԀandBlakely 0   mandates.Thetermofimprisonmentthatmaybeimposedbasedsolelyonthe   jurysverdictisthemiddleterm.Thejudgemaynotimposetheupperterm 0  unlesshefindsthatthereareadditionalaggravatingfactors.Bystatuteand   regulation,however,theseaggravatingfactorscannotbefoundtruebeyonda 0 reasonabledoubtbyaunanimousjury.Theyarefactorsreservedsolelytothe  trialjudgebaseduponapreponderanceoftheevidencestandardandgleaned 0 frommaterialthatthejuryneverconsidered(e.g.,probationreports).Indeed,  byvirtueofrule4.420,subdivision(d), ^ Ԁthejudgeisspecificallyprohibited 0 fromimposingtheuppertermbasedonanelementoftheunderlyingoffense,  whichisoneoftheverythingsthatthejurymustunanimouslyfindtobetrue 0  beyondareasonabledoubt.    ` Significantly,theBlakely V decisionpointedtosimilarproceduresunder 0   WashingtonstatelawasfailingtheApprenditest.Specifically,thecourtnoted   thatunderWashingtonlaw [a]judgemayimposeasentenceabovethe 0  standardrange[only]ifhefindssubstantialandcompellingreasonsjustifying   anexceptionalsentence.9.94A.120(2).TheActlistsaggravatingfactors 0  thatjustifysuchadeparture,whichitrecitestobeillustrativeratherthan  exhaustive.9.94A.390.Nevertheless,areasonofferedtojustifyan 0 exceptionalsentencecanbeconsideredonlyifittakesintoaccountfactors  otherthanthosewhichareusedincomputingthestandardrangesentencefor 0 theoffense.Statev.Gore,143Wash.2d288,315316,21P.3d262,277  (2001).Whenajudgeimposesanexceptionalsentence,hemustsetforth 0 findingsoffactandconclusionsoflawsupportingit.9.94A.120(3).   (Blakely V at2004WL1402697at*2,italicsadded.) 0"  ` Thusinallpertinentrespects,Californiasdeterminatesentencinglaw $ suffersfromthesamedefectsastheWashingtonschemethattheUnitedStates 0!& SupremeCourtdeclaredunconstitutionalinBlakely. "(  ` 2.0  ConsecutiveSentences .  >;0$*   ` SimilartotheSixthAmendmentflawsintherulesgoverningimposition %!, oftheupperterm,therulesgoverningimpositionofconsecutivetermsalso 6'".  violatetheApprendi l andBlakelymandates. ($0  ` PenalCode _ section669providesthatintheabsenceofspecialfindings  bythetrialjudge,sentencesfortwoormorefeloniesshallrunconcurrently.b 2  2       0  TheruleimplementingthatstatuteisCaliforniaRulesofCourt, k rule4.425.p  2  3         ` Basedontheserules,inordertosentenceconsecutivelyratherthan 0  concurrently,thetrialjudgemustfindoneormoreofthefactorslistedinrule   4.425.Noneofthesefactorsarepresentedtoorfoundtruebeyonda 0   reasonabledoubtbythejury.Consecutivesentencingisanenhanced   sentencingpowerreservedsolelytothetrialjudgebaseduponfactorsbeyond 0   thoseauthorizedbythejuryverdictalone.Assuch,theconsecutive_sentencing   schemeinCaliforniafailstheApprenditestasexplainedinBlakelyandthus  violatestheSixthAmendmentrighttoajurytrial. 0   ` C.0 ApplicationtoAppellantsCase .   ` Appellantsattorneyarguedatthatthecircumstancesinmitigation 6  outweighedthoseinaggravationandthatthetrialcourtshouldimposethelow   termofthreeyearsinstateprison;further,becauseitwasnotproventhatthe 6   actsfoundbythejuryoccurredonseparateoccasions,punishmentonthreeof    thefourcountsofconvictionshouldbestayedpursuanttoPenalCodesection 6  654.(CT333343;RT[32803]1029.)R 2  4      ׀Becauseappellantwasafirst   offender,hisattorneyarguedthat hecannotbesentforanaggravatedterm, 6  consecutiveonallcounts.(RT29.)Theprosecutorarguedforimpositionof  theuppertermofeightyearsincountoneandforconsecutivesentencesof 6 onethirdthemidtermontheremainingthreecounts,whichwouldprovidefor  atotaltermofimprisonmentof14yearsinprison.(CT327332;RT2937.) 6  ` Thetrialcourtsentencedappellanttotheuppertermofeightyearsin  prisonforhisconvictionofviolatingPenalCodesection288,subdivision(a), 6 incountone.(RT42.)Inimposingtheupperterm,thecourtstatedthatit   consideredthecircumstancesinmitigationandaggravationcitedbycounsel 6" andfound thosecircumstancesinaggravationtobeverycompellingandto $ outweighthecircumstancesinmitigation.(RT3940.)Specifically,thecourt 6!& reliedupon twocircumstancesinaggravation...asthesolebasisformy "( determinationtoimposetheuppertermastoeachcountifIwastoanalyze 6$* eachcountseparately.(RT40.) %!,  ` Thefirstfactorrelieduponbythetrialcourtwasrule4.421(a)(11).The 6'". courtfoundthat [w]ithoutquestionthedefendanttookadvantageofaposition ($0 oftrustandconfidencetocommiteachoftheseoffenses.(RT4041.)The  second aggravatingfactorrelieduponbythecourtwasrule4.421(a)(8), 0 whichwas themannerinwhicheachofthecrimeswascommitted,was  carriedoutinafashionthatwouldindicateplanning,sophisticationor 0  professionalism.(RT4142.)    ` Becauseeachofthetwoaggravatingfactorsrelieduponbythecourt 0   involvednonrecidivistconduct,appellantwasentitledunderApprendiand   BlakelytoajurytrialinwhichthePeoplewouldberequiredtoprovethateach 0  ofthosefactorswastruebeyondareasonabledoubt.Appellantsupperterm   sentenceofeightyearsimprisonmentdoesnotmeetconstitutionalmuster 0  underthecontrollingdecisionallawoftheUnitedStatesSupremeCourt.   ` So,too,musttheadditionalpunishmentimposedbyimpositionof 0 consecutivesentencesbereversed.Thecourtfound fourindependent  separatereasonsforimposingconsecutivesentencesastothecountsinthis 0 case.(RT43.)Thecourtcitedthefollowingfactors:1)rule4.425(a)(1), the  crimesandtheirobjectiveswerepredominantlyindependentofoneanother; 0 2)rule4.425(a)(3), thecrimeswerecommittedatdifferenttimesandseparate   places...;3)rule4.425(b), whichpertainstoothercircumstancesin 0" aggravationnotpreviouslyconsideredandnotanelementofthecharges. $ (RT43.) 0!&  ` Inregardtothethirdreason,thecourtcitedrules4.421(b),concerning "( factsrelatingtothedefendant;rule4.421(c),concerninganyotherfacts 0$* statutorilydeclaredtobecircumstancesinaggravation,andrule4.408, %!, concerningadditionalcriteriareasonablyrelatedtothedecisionbeingmade. 0'". (RT4445.)Thecourtnoted asafourthandseparatereasonforimposing ($0 consecutivesentences,thatthedefendantduringaninterimperiodwhichmight 0*%2 beviewedasaperiodwherehewasnotinvolvedincriminalactivitywas +'4 involved[inothermolestations]. (RT4546.) 0-(6 _ ` Becausethefactorsemployedbythetrialcourttoimposethese  enhancedsentenceswerenotpresentedtoorconsideredbyajury,thetrial 0 judgehadnoauthoritytoimposeeithertheuppertermorconsecutive  sentences.Thus,theimpositionofconcurrentandconsecutivesentencesinthis 0  caseviolatedappellantsSixthAmendmentrighttoajurytrial.  #;m[m!/#[m;mԀ(Blakel x y,   supra,2004WL1402697at*45.)#;m[mLW#[m;m 0       ` InBlakely,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtrenderedadecisionof   fundamentalconstitutionalimportance,impactingupontheSixthAmendment 0  righttoajurytrialofcountlessdefendantsthroughouttheUnitedStates.   Appellantisoneofthosedefendants#;m[mW#[m;m.JustastheBlakelydecisioninvalidated 0  asignificantportionofthesentencingschemeutilizedbythetrialcourtsinthe  stateofWashington,itsrationaleapplieswithequalforcetoasignificantpart 0 ofthedeterminatesentencinglawinCaliforniaandthesentencinglawsof  otherstatesaswell.r 2  5      ׀ 0  `  u #;m[mY#[m;mAppellantthereforerespectfullyasksthiscourttograntrehearingso  thathemayhavetheopportunitytoprovidefullbriefingonthisquestionof 0 firstimpression,inordertoprovidethiscourtwithathoroughreviewofthe   decisionalauthoritygoverningthisissue,itsapplicationtothefactsofhiscase, 0" aswellastheapplicablestandardofprejudice,whichwarrantsreversalofthe $ judgmentinthismatter. 0!& #;m[m[#[m;m  "( @%  CONCLUSION  ^Ԉ   ` Becauseofthemagnitudeoftheissueinthiscaseandthescopeofits -} impact,appellantrespectfullyasksthiscourttograntrehearingandprovide  thepartieswiththeopportunitytobriefthisentireissueatlength.Shouldthis - } courtgrantappellantsrequestforrehearing,appellantrequestssufficienttime   forbothpartiestoundertaketheextensiveresearchandwritingnecessaryto - }  fullyexplicatethisnovelandimportantsentencingmatter.    #;m[mM^# ` Dated:July7,2004    ` 0 0 򀀀󀀀    ` 0 0  h GORDONS.BROWNELL,ESQ.    ` 0 0 0h  AttorneyforDefendantandAppellanth h   ` 0 0 0h   DARRYEALWOODROWWILSON  x  @x  @x  @x  @x h h   [m;m#;m[md#  CERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCE  +{    ` PursuanttoCaliforniaRulesofCourt,rule33(b),Icertifythat )y pursuanttothewordcountconductedbymywordprocessingprogram(Word  Perfect10forWindows)thatthispetitionforreview,excludingtheCertificate )y! ofCompliance,consistsof2,814words.  #  ` Dated:July7,2004 #'  ` 0 0 򀀀󀀀&!+    ` 0 0  h GORDONS.BROWNELL,ESQ.'",    ` 0 0 0h  AttorneyforDefendantandAppellant(#-h h   ` 0 0 0h   DARRYEALWOODROWWILSON  x  @x  @x  @x  @x )$.h h   @ PROOFOFSERVICEBYMAIL    ` Ideclarethat: -}  ` IamamemberoftheStateBarofCalifornia.Iamovertheageof18  yearsandnotapartytothewithin-entitledcause.Mybusinessaddressis1241 - } AdamsStreet,#1139,St.Helena,CA94574.    ` OnJuly7,2004,Iservedtheattached PETITIONFOR - }  REHEARING(A102205 )hereinbyplacingatruecopythereofenclosedin    asealedenvelopewithfirst-classpostagethereonfullyprepaid,intheUnited 9  StatesMailatSt.Helena,CAaddressedasfollows:   Hon.BillLockyer   h     Hon.RonaldT.L.Young 9  AttorneyGeneral   h     JudgeoftheSuperiorCourt 9 StateofCalifornia   h     NapaCountySuperiorCourt 9 JillM.Thayer   h     825BrownStreet 9 DeputyAttorneyGeneral h     Napa,CA94559 9 455GoldenGateAve.,#11000 9 SanFrancisco,CA941022664 9 FirstDistrictAppellateProject    Hon.GaryA.Lieberstein 9 Attn:J.BradleyOConnell,Esq.    NapaCountyDistrictAttorney 9 730HarrisonStreet,#201 h     931ParkwayMall 9 SanFrancisco,CA94107 h     Napa,CA94559 9 DarryealWoodrowWilson 9 (Appellanthasinstructedappellate 9   counselinwritingnottoservehim 9!! withcopiesofthebriefsfiledin 9"" thismatter.) 9##  ` Ideclareunderpenaltyofperjurythattheforegoingistrueandcorrect 9% % andthatthisdeclarationwasexecutedonJuly7,2004,atSt.Helena, & "' California. 9(#)  `     h   򀀀 * &,  `     h 0  GORDONS.BROWNELL+ '-