Topic: other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that in… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #22

15 canonical passages across 11 cases, quoted by 6,665 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Apprendi v. New Jersey.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Apprendi v. New Jersey Anchor
scotus · 2000
green “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.” 3,994
2 United States v. Booker
scotus · 2004
green “any fact (other than a prior conviction) which is necessary to support a sentence exceeding the maximum authorized by the facts established by a plea of guilty or a jury verdict must be admitted by the defendant or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.” 782
3 Blakely v. Washington
scotus · 2004
green “the 'statutory maximum' for apprendi purposes is the maximum sentence a judge may impose solely on the basis of the facts reflected in the jury verdict or admitted by the defendant.” 752
4 People v. Watson
cal · 1956
green “it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appealing party would have been reached in the absence of the error.” 383
5 United States v. Gonzalez-Huerta
ca10 · 2005
green “seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” 193
6 Blakely v. Washington
scotus · 2004
green “the relevant 'statutory maximum' is not the maximum sentence a judge may impose after finding additional facts, but the maximum he may impose without any additional findings.” 178
7 Apprendi v. New Jersey
scotus · 2000
green “a jury determination that he is guilty of every element of the crime with which he is charged, beyond a reasonable doubt.” 157
8 Ring v. Arizona
scotus · 2002
green “if a state makes an increase in a defendant's authorized punishment contingent on the finding of a fact, that fact - no matter how the state labels it - must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.” 95
9 Blakely v. Washington
scotus · 2004
green “every defendant has the right to insist that the prosecutor prove to a jury all facts legally essential to the punishment.” 44
10 Cunningham v. California
scotus · 2007
green “if the jury's verdict alone does not authorize the sentence, if, instead, the judge must find an additional fact to impose the longer term, the sixth amendment requirement is not satisfied.” 25
11 United States v. Dazey
ca10 · 2005
green “a jury applying a reasonable doubt standard would not have found the same material facts that a judge found by a preponderance of the evidence.” 22
12 United States v. Dazey
ca10 · 2005
green “seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” 21
13 United States v. Clifton
ca10 · 2005
green “non-constitutional and constitutional booker errors satisfy the first two prongs of the plain-error test.” 9
14 United States v. Yazzie
ca10 · 2005
green “constitutional booker error . . . occurs when the district court applies the guidelines in a mandatory fashion, makes factual findings (other than the fact of prior convictions), and imposes a sentence above the maximum that would apply in the absence of such findings.” 6
15 In Re Jesusa
cal · 2004
green “we typically apply a harmless-error analysis when a statutory mandate is disobeyed, except in a narrow category of circumstances when we deem the error reversible per se. this practice derives from article vi, section 13 of the california constitution” 4

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check