Although Apprendi Applies, No Relief for Petitioner

Allen v. Reed, 2005 WL 2697246 (10/21/05) - Ultimately, another example of how unfair habeas law is. The 10th holds the d.ct. was wrong to determine Apprendi did not apply to the petitioner's case. Apprendi applied because, although the petitioner was sentenced before Apprendi, the petitioner's state appeal was not decided until after Apprendi. BUT, this procedural victory does the petitioner no substantive good. The state court's decision that the Colorado sentencing statutes [that are like New Mexico's in that a judicial finding of aggravating circumstances allows the court to increase a sentence above the base sentence] were okey-dokey under Apprendi was not unreasonable. That was so because it was just like the decisions federal courts were making before Blakely about the guidelines. That the Colorado S.Ct. has now held that the state's sentencing statutes violate Apprendi as explained in Blakely and Booker doesn't matter. What matters is what was the "clearly established" law when the petitioner's case was final in 2002 before Blakely.