Search for: "Almendarez-Torres v. United States"
Results 1 - 20
of 43
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jun 2024, 12:33 pm
Justice Kavanaugh also responded to Justice Thomas's concurrence to explain why Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
20 May 2024, 10:22 am
New Jersey; and (2) whether this court should overrule Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 9:01 pm
At times, the “benevolent appellate gods smiled down on me” (36), she writes, with Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
4 Oct 2017, 3:12 pm
That exception, stemming from Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 6:23 am
Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 7:20 am
It was Justice Scalia’s dissent in Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
28 Oct 2015, 6:28 pm
In United States v. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 12:11 pm
United States – which was a product of the residual clause itself — has generated. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 9:11 am
United States, 14-5227, and Freidus v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 1:37 pm
United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2013, 2:39 pm
The Third Circuit rejected this argument under Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
17 Jul 2013, 4:47 pm
In this “narrow range of cases,” the sentencing court could examine court documents – the charging instrument and the jury instructions – to determine if the state conviction was for the branch of the relevant crime that matched the generic federal definition of the predicate offense for a “violent felony” under the ACCA. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 8:18 pm
United States and require that facts necessary for the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences (not just statutory maximums) be found by juries, it found no need to revisit another longstanding Apprendi wrinkle: the rule in Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 9:31 am
The Supreme Court rejected that argument in Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 4:00 pm
United States, which upheld mandatory minimums against an Apprendi challenge. [read post]
17 May 2012, 7:55 am
United States, 11-5683, and Hill v. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 6:27 am
United States and United States v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 9:52 am
United States (10-6117) (both of which had been relisted three times), which presented the question whether Almendarez-Torres v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 6:41 am
United States and United States v. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 1:49 am
United States, 10-5296, and Vazquez v. [read post]
