Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Gordon

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 28, 2007No. 46 EAP 2006PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice BALDWIN.

In this matter, we are called to resolve whether Appellant Edward Gordon’s constitutionally guaranteed right to trial by jury was violated. We granted allocatur limited to resolution of whether it violates the United States and/or Pennsylvania Constitutions when a judge, not a jury, finds by a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant has been convicted of multiple crimes of violence arising from separate criminal transactions.

The issue arises in the context of Appellant’s challenge to the constitutionality of the “Three Strikes”…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Shepard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Washington, T., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  2. Commonwealth v. Batts, Q., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  3. Erlinger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2024
  4. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Wolfe, M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. Commonwealth v. BarnesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API