Petitioners have now filed their cert. petitions in Portalatin v. Graham. There are three separate petitions, one each for each of the petitioners, namely Portalatin, Morris, and Phillips.
Here's the question presented in Portalatin's petition, 10-8502:
Should this Court grant this petition for a writ of certiorari to determine whether, when a New York judge imposes an enhanced sentence upon a criminal defendant pursuant to the State’s persistent felony offender statute, the judge’s determination that, considering the history and character of the defendant and the nature and circumstances of his criminal conduct, the imposition of a life sentence would best serve the public interest is itself a factfinding for Apprendi purposes that is required to be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and whether imposing such enhanced sentence violates clearly-established holdings of this Court under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and its progeny?
Here's the question presented in Morris's petition, 10-8464:
The Court should decide whether it is erroneous and unreasonable to broadly interpret the "fact of a prior conviction" exception to the Apprendi rule so that it encompasses findings regarding the seriousness and extensiveness of those convictions.
If I get a hold of the Phillips petition, I'll add it to the post.
UPDATE: Here are the questions presented in Phillips' petition, 10-8470:
1. The Court should decide the dispositive threshold question as to what rule to use in determining the relevant time for deciding in a post-AEDPA habeas case what Supreme Court precedent applies, i.e. what is “clearly established federal law” under 28 U.S.C. §2254 - - either the date-of-finality rule or the date-of-the-last-reasoned-state-court-decision rule - - thereby resolving the current split among federal Circuit Courts recently deciding this issue.
2. Whether it is erroneous and unreasonable to interpret broadly the "fact of a prior conviction" exception to the Apprendi rule so that it encompasses findings regarding the seriousness and extensiveness of those convictions?