[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

• Introduced by Sen. Adam Kline, (D-Seattle) (D) on January 26, 2005, to amend the Sentencing Reform Act to require that any fact used to support the imposition of an exceptional sentence above a defendant's standard sentencing range be proven at trial beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 26, 2005.
  • Referred to the Senate Rules Committee on February 28, 2005.
  • Amendment offered by Sen. Adam Kline, (D-Seattle) (D) on March 8, 2005, to strike the entire bill and insert a wholly new bill.
• Passed in the Senate (48 to 0) on March 8, 2005, to declare an intent to conform the sentencing reform act to comply with the ruling in Blakely v. Washington. [Vote Details and Comments]
• Received in the House on March 18, 2005.
  • Referred to the House Criminal Justice & Corrections Committee on March 18, 2005.
  • Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on April 1, 2005.
  • Referred to the House Rules Committee on April 4, 2005.
  • Amendment offered by Rep. Ruth Kagi, (D-Lake Forest Park) (D) on April 11, 2005, to clarify the intent of the legislature by recognizing the need to restore judicial discretion in sentencing. It directs the Sentencing Guidelines Commission to study the sentencing reform act and report its findings to the legislature by December 1, 2005.
  • The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on April 12, 2005.
• Passed in the House (96 to 1) on April 12, 2005, to declare an intent to conform the sentencing reform act to comply with the ruling in Blakely v. Washington. [Vote Details and Comments]
• Received in the Senate on April 14, 2005.
• Passed in the Senate (46 to 0) on April 14, 2005, to concur in House amendments. [Vote Details and Comments]
• Signed by Gov. Christine Gregoire on April 14, 2005, to declare an intent to conform the sentencing reform act to comply with the ruling in Blakely v. Washington.