we are persuaded the General Assembly expected judges would weigh all evidence relevant to punishment when it established a range of potential sentences for defendant’s offense class and prior record level. IV. DISPOSITION Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied. The trial court did not violate defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to jury trial when it found a statutory aggravating factor but sentenced defendant within the presumptive range. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. REVERSED. Justice TIMMONS-GOODSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. 1 . The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.” U.S. Const. amend. VI. See Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, 152-54 (1968) (<HOLDING>). More explicit than the Sixth Amendment, the
holding the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment extends the right to jury trial to defendants in serious criminal cases in state courts holding that any confrontation right is found in the fourteenth amendments due process clause not the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment recognizing that the integrity of the family unit has found protection in the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment holding the sixth amendment right to effective assistance extends to a criminal defendants first appeal as of right holding the double jeopardy clause applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment