(A)Right to a Jury Determination.   Due process requires the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and the jury to determine the existence of, a sentencing factor that operates to increase the penalty above the statutory maximum sentence.[182]  This rule, however, only applies where the factual determination increases the maximum penalty beyond the statutory range authorized by the jury's verdict -- it does not apply to factors that increase the statutory minimum sentence or otherwise increase the penalty imposed within the statutory maximum.  Apprendi error may invalidate the sentence as a whole if the maximum was raised by the improperly found factor.

[182] Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000); United States v. Buckland, 259 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2001) (declaring sentencing scheme of 21 U.S.C. § § 841(b)(1)(A) and (B) facially unconstitutional since they permit the judge to find a fact, the quantity of drugs, under the preponderance of the evidence standard, that increases the maximum penalty to which a defendant is exposed).

Ninth Circuit

SENTENCE " GROUNDS " APPRENDI ERROR IN SENTENCING DEFENDANT UNDER THREE STRIKES LAW ON THE BASIS OF FACTS IN THE PRIOR CASE THAT WERE NOT FOUND TRUE BY A JURY OR ADMITTED AS TRUE BY THE DEFENDANT
Wilson v. Knowles, ___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 383961 (9th Cir. Feb. 8, 2011)(habeas corpus granted, vacating Three Strikes sentence imposed in violation of petitioner's right to due process under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), where sentencing court imposed the sentence on the basis of three facts in the prior case that were not found true by a jury or admitted as true by the defendant).

SENTENCE " GROUNDS " APPRENDI ERROR IN SENTENCING DEFENDANT UNDER THREE STRIKES LAW ON THE BASIS OF FACTS IN THE PRIOR CASE THAT WERE NOT FOUND TRUE BY A JURY OR ADMITTED AS TRUE BY THE DEFENDANT
Wilson v. Knowles, ___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 383961 (9th Cir. Feb. 8, 2011)(habeas corpus granted, vacating Three Strikes sentence imposed in violation of petitioner's right to due process under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), where sentencing court imposed the sentence on the basis of three facts in the prior case that were not found true by a jury or admitted as true by the defendant).

SENTENCE " GROUNDS " APPRENDI ERROR IN SENTENCING DEFENDANT UNDER THREE STRIKES LAW ON THE BASIS OF FACTS IN THE PRIOR CASE THAT WERE NOT FOUND TRUE BY A JURY OR ADMITTED AS TRUE BY THE DEFENDANT
Wilson v. Knowles, 631 F.3d 1295, 2011 WL 383961 (9th Cir. Feb. 8, 2011)(habeas corpus granted, vacating Three Strikes sentence imposed in violation of petitioner's right to due process under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), where sentencing court imposed the sentence on the basis of three facts in the prior case that were not found true by a jury or admitted as true by the defendant).

Other

CAL POST CON " PLEA BARGAINING " JUDICIAL INVOLVEMENT
People v. Clancey, 202 Cal.App.4th 790 (Cal.App. Jan. 10, 2012) (trial court's offered sentence was not proper because it was: 1) conditioned on the defendant pleading to all counts and admitting all allegations, and 2) operated as a commitment by the judge to impose the offered sentence or to allow the defendant to withdraw the pleas and admissions).