Richard Crayton v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge.
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), holds that facts increasing a criminal defendant’s maximum permissible sentence must be established, beyond a reasonable doubt, to the satisfaction of the trier of fact (a jury unless the defendant agrees to a bench trial or formally admits the facts). Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545, 122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002), holds that facts increasing the minimum permissible sentence may be found by a judge on the preponderance of the evidence. But Alleyne v. United States, — U.S. -,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Alleyne v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Rhines v. WeberSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Joseph Perrone v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2018
- Jason Lund v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019
- Commonwealth, Aplt v. Dimatteo, P.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Benard McKinley v. Kim ButlerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
- Jennifer Krieger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.