Lightfoot v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
1ConcurrenceMurdock, Justice
The main opinion states that the “jury-trial right[]” recognized under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), “now applies] to increases in both mandatory maximum sentences and mandatory minimum sentences.” 152 So.3d at 450. Although this is true, it does not in my view fully express the reason for which a sentence enhancement — any sentence enhancement — must be considered by a jury.
My view in this regard aligns with that of Justice Shaw as explained in the first four paragraphs of his special writing in the present case, including particularly the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Poole v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2002
- Ex Parte ThomasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1982
- Thomas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1981
- Lightfoot v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 2012