Search for: ""Apprendi v. New Jersey" OR "530 U.S. 466"" Results 61 - 80 of 101
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2010, 2:42 pm
New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 that a defendant has the right to a jury trial on any facts—other than a prior conviction—that increase the penalty for a conviction beyond the statutory maximum. [read post]
10 Jan 2009, 1:17 pm
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000): "'[T]he indictment must allege whatever is in law essential to the punishment sought to be inflicted.' (quoting 1 J. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 11:55 am
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) can't be retroactively applied under Teague. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 11:00 am by Anthony Lake
New Jersey530 U.S. 466 (2000), the forerunner of the Court's landmark decisions in Blakely v. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 1:48 pm by WIMS
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), where a judge, and not a jury, determined the facts as to the number of days of violation under a schedule of fines. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 8:22 am by Melinda Ghilardi
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), during sentencing because the jury made no finding of fact as to whether the substances involved in the case were Schedule II, III or IV substances? [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 6:43 pm
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Blakely v. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 5:56 am by MBettman
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.) [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 12:21 pm by John Elwood
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. [read post]