Search for: "Apprendi v. New Jersey" Results 41 - 60 of 233
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2020, 2:14 pm by Frank Heft
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) and recent statutory interpretation of those provisions. [read post]
28 Dec 2006, 10:39 am
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000) and are not facts that a jury must find under Blakely v. [read post]
23 Jun 2013, 9:28 pm by Luke Rioux
New Jersey and held that facts which increase the maximum sentence must be submitted to the jury for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
15 Mar 2012, 8:51 am by Susan F. Mandiberg
New Jersey: “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]
7 Oct 2012, 8:46 am by stu@crimapp.com
In 2000, the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark case of Apprendi v New Jersey, 530 US 466; 120 S Ct 2348; 147 L Ed 2d 435 (2000), which called into doubt sentencing guideline schemes (and presumptive sentencing schemes around the country). ...140, 159–164; 715 NW2d 778 (2006), the Michigan Supreme Court held that Michigan's indeterminate sentencing system is not affected by Blakely because a defendant's maximum sentence in… [read post]
7 Sep 2011, 7:01 am by Conor McEvily
Liptak points to Justice Breyer’s dissent in Apprendi v. [read post]