skip navigation
search

WASHINGTON v. RECUENCO (No. 05-83)
154 Wash. 2d 156, 110 P. 3d 188, reversed and remanded.
Syllabus

Opinion
[Thomas]
Concurrence
[Kennedy]
Dissent
[Stevens]
Dissent
[Ginsburg]
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version

548 U. S. ____ (2006)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

WASHINGTON, PETITIONER v. ARTURO R.
RECUENCO

on writ of certiorari to the supreme court ofwashington


[June 26, 2006]

    Justice Kennedy, concurring.

    The opinions for the Court in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466 (2000) , Blakely v. Washington, 542 U. S. 296 (2004) , and their progeny were accompanied by dissents. The Court does not revisit these cases today, and it describes their holdings accurately. On these premises, the Court’s analysis is correct. Cf. Ring v. Arizona, 536 U. S. 584, 613 (2002) (Kennedy, J., concurring). With these observations I join the Court’s opinion.