Difference between revisions of "Apprendi v. New Jersey"
From Conservapedia
(New page: In ''Apprendi v. New Jersey'', 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), the U.S. Supreme Court held that any fact (other than a prior conviction) that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the sta...) |
m (reasonable doubt) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In ''Apprendi v. New Jersey'', 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that any fact (other than a prior conviction) that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. | + | In ''Apprendi v. New Jersey'', 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that any fact (other than a prior conviction) that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be proved to a jury beyond a [[reasonable doubt]]. |
[[category:US Supreme Court Cases]] | [[category:US Supreme Court Cases]] | ||
Revision as of 13:03, August 7, 2007
In Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), the U.S. Supreme Court held that any fact (other than a prior conviction) that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
