The Kansas Commission dealt with "Blakely type" issues before the Supreme Court decision because of the Kansas vs Gould decision in 2002.
Changes in Kansas Statutes Post Gould (.PDF)
Forms to be used by juries when dealing with raising sentences above the guideline mazimum. (.PDF)
The Michigan Supreme Court issued the attached decision that includes a footnote describing how the Court interprets the impact that Blakely will have on the Michigan sentencing guidelines scheme.
Syllabus of People vs. Claypool
Decision - People of the State of Michigan vs. Claypool
The Impact of Blakely v. Washington on Sentencing in Minnesota - Short Term Recommendations (.PDF)
The Impact of Blakely v. Washington on Sentencing in Minnesota - Long Term Recommendations (.PDF)
On June 24, 2004, the US Supreme Court found that sentences that depart
above the standard range of the Washington Sentencing
Guidelines to be in violation of the 6th Amendment, if the facts supporting
such a sentence were not admitted by the defendant nor proven beyond a
reasonable doubt. Blakely v Washington (542 U.S. _____) (2004)
The Commission has received numerous inquiries related to this decision and
its impact on the Pennsylvania Guidelines. Following a
preliminary analysis of the Opinion of the Court (Scalia) and the
dissenting opinions (particularly Breyer), and discussions with experts
throughout the state and country, there seems to be consensus that the
Blakely decision does not appear to impact the Pennsylvania
Sentencing Guidelines. In both the Opinion by Justice Scalia (page 13 of
the Opinion), and the dissent by Justice Breyer (page 5 of his
dissent), a distinction is made between determinate sentencing systems,
such as Washington and Kansas, and indeterminate sentencing
systems. An indeterminate sentencing system, such as that retained by
Pennsylvania, appears safe, particularly because the guidelines and Blakely
v Washington (542 U.S. _____) (2004)most mandatories apply to minimum
sentences and do not limit or control maximum sentences.