Oregon v. Ice
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Ginsburg
This case concerns the scope of the Sixth Amendment’s jury-trial guarantee, as construed in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U. S. 296 (2004). Those decisions are rooted in the historic jury function — determining whether the prosecution has proved each element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt. They hold that it is within the jury’s province to determine any fact (other than the existence of a prior conviction) that increases the maximum punishment authorized for a particular offense. Thus far, the Court has not extended the Apprendi and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by563 opinions
- State v. Marcum (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. Bonnell (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- Dillon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- State v. HunterOhio Supreme Court · 2011
- State of Tennessee v. James Allen PollardTennessee Supreme Court · 2013
558 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.