Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

United States v. Marion Promise, A/K/A Mario,defendant-Appellant

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided July 17, 2001No. 99-4737Published

1Concurring in the judgmentLuttig, Circuit Judge

I believe that, in interpreting 21 U.S.C. § 841, this court, and every other Court of Appeals, has, however understandably, fundamentally misunderstood the Supreme Court’s decisions in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), Jones v. *169United, States, 526 U.S. 227, 119 S.Ct. 1215, 143 L.Ed.2d 311 (1999), and Castillo v. United States, 530 U.S. 120, 120 S.Ct. 2090, 147 L.Ed.2d 94 (2000), on the one hand, and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), on the other, outright substituting Apprendi's constitutional…

2Cases cited66 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  5. McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

61 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