United States v. Bailey
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
LUCERO, Circuit Judge.
In Apprendi v. New Jersey, the Supreme Court announced a new rule of constitutional law: “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.” 530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Appellant Teddy Leroy Bailey, for the first time on appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence, raises a claim under Apprendi. He neither objected to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- United States of America v. Carless JonesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United States v. Gary Allen Lott, United States of America v. Johnny Marton Lott, AKA Johnny Martin LottCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. AveryCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. FredetteCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Price v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Bryce Franklin v. Ronald Martinez and Hector Balderas, Attorney General of the State of New MexicoDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2025
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.