28 Laver/s second degree robbery conviction (without a jury finding of aggravating factors) subjected him to a maximum penalty of 84 months under the SRA. Lavery, 154 Wn.2d at 254. 29 One month after our Supreme Court published Lavery, this court issued State v. Ball, 127 Wn. App. 956, 113 P.3d 520 (2005), review denied, 156 Wn.2d 1018 (2006). Ball focused on the necessity of separately proving Washington State convictions of which the trial court had authority to take judicial notice. It did not expressly address the Lavery court’s analysis holding that under Apprendi, a sentence of life without possibility of parole exceeds the statutory maximum that may be imposed on a jury’s guilty verdict. Lavery, 154 Wn.2d at 256. But cf. State v. Magers, 164 Wn.2d 174, 193, 189 P.3d 126 (2008) (<HOLDING>). 30 This element does not require proving the
holding that blakely does not apply to the federal sentencing guidelines holding that appellant properly preserved booker claim by citing blakely in his written objections to the psi and reminding the court at sentencing of his blakely objection holding that the court of appeals has held that blakely does not apply to sentencing under the poaa blakely being specifically directed at exceptional sentences ball 127 wn app at 957 95960 we agree with this conclusion and determine that blakely has no application to the instant case holding that blakely did not apply to a case that was final but not on direct review when blakely was decided and in which the trial court later allowed a belated appeal holding blakely not retroactive