harris
argued
march
decided
june
petitioner
sold
illegal
narcotics
pawnshop
unconcealed
semiautomatic
pistol
side
arrested
violating
inter
alia
provides
relevant
part
person
relation
drug
trafficking
crime
uses
carries
firearm
shall
addition
punishment
crime
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
ii
firearm
brandished
sentenced
less
years
iii
firearm
discharged
sentenced
less
years
government
proceeded
assumption
provision
defines
single
crime
brandishing
sentencing
factor
found
judge
following
trial
indictment
said
nothing
brandishing
subsection
ii
simply
alleging
elements
principal
paragraph
petitioner
convicted
presentence
report
recommended
receive
minimum
sentence
objected
arguing
brandishing
element
separate
statutory
offense
indicted
convicted
sentencing
hearing
district
overruled
objection
found
brandished
gun
sentenced
seven
years
prison
affirming
fourth
circuit
rejected
petitioner
statutory
argument
found
mcmillan
pennsylvania
foreclosed
argument
brandishing
sentencing
factor
statute
unconstitutional
apprendi
new
jersey
apprendi
held
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
effect
element
crime
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
federal
prosecutions
alleged
indictment
handed
grand
jury
years
earlier
mcmillan
sustained
statute
increased
minimum
penalty
crime
though
beyond
statutory
maximum
judge
found
defendant
possessed
firearm
held
judgment
affirmed
affirmed
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
respect
parts
ii
iv
concluding
matter
statutory
interpretation
defines
single
offense
brandishing
discharging
sentencing
factors
found
judge
offense
elements
found
jury
pp
prohibition
structure
suggests
brandishing
discharging
sentencing
factors
federal
laws
usually
list
offense
elements
single
sentence
separate
sentencing
factors
subsections
castillo
instant
statute
lengthy
principal
paragraph
lists
elements
complete
crime
toward
end
paragraph
word
shall
often
divides
provisions
ones
jones
following
shall
separate
subsections
explain
defendants
sentenced
thus
presume
principal
paragraph
defines
single
crime
subsections
identify
sentencing
factors
pp
jones
illustrates
statute
text
might
provide
evidence
contrary
critical
textual
clues
reinforce
interpretation
brandishing
singled
paradigmatic
sentencing
factor
castillo
supra
sentencing
guidelines
moreover
brandishing
discharging
factors
affect
sentences
numerous
crimes
incremental
changes
minimum
penalty
issue
precisely
one
expect
see
provisions
meant
identify
matters
sentencing
judge
consideration
pp
canon
constitutional
avoidance
provides
statute
susceptible
two
constructions
must
adopt
one
avoids
grave
doubtful
constitutional
questions
plays
role
constitutional
principle
petitioner
says
interpretation
statute
violate
fact
increasing
statutory
minimum
sentence
must
accorded
safeguards
assigned
elements
rejected
mcmillan
petitioner
suggestion
canon
used
avoid
overruling
one
precedents
novel
given
mcmillan
place
enacted
unsound
congress
reason
believe
approaching
constitutional
line
following
instruction
gave
mcmillan
pp
reaffirming
mcmillan
employing
approach
outlined
opinion
concludes
ii
constitutional
basing
increase
defendant
minimum
sentence
judicial
finding
brandishing
evade
fifth
sixth
amendments
requirements
congress
simply
dictated
precise
weight
given
one
traditional
sentencing
factor
mcmillan
supra
pp
justice
kennedy
joined
chief
justice
justice
justice
scalia
concluded
part
iii
ii
constitutional
mcmillan
remains
sound
authority
apprendi
overrule
precedent
absent
special
justification
justification
offered
petitioner
apprendi
mcmillan
reconciled
decisions
consistent
however
fundamental
distinction
factual
findings
issue
two
cases
apprendi
said
fact
extending
defendant
sentence
beyond
maximum
authorized
jury
verdict
considered
element
aggravated
crime
framers
bill
rights
said
fact
increasing
mandatory
minimum
extending
sentence
beyond
statutory
maximum
jury
verdict
authorized
judge
impose
minimum
without
finding
sort
fact
like
facts
judges
traditionally
considered
exercising
discretion
choose
sentence
within
range
authorized
jury
verdict
facts
constitution
require
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
read
together
mcmillan
apprendi
mean
facts
setting
outer
limits
sentence
judicial
power
impose
elements
crime
purposes
constitutional
analysis
within
range
authorized
jury
verdict
however
political
system
may
channel
judicial
discretion
rely
upon
judicial
expertise
requiring
defendants
serve
minimum
terms
judges
make
certain
factual
findings
legislatures
relied
upon
mcmillan
holding
reason
overturn
statutes
cast
uncertainty
upon
sentences
imposed
pp
justice
breyer
concluded
although
apprendi
new
jersey
easily
distinguished
case
terms
logic
sixth
amendment
permits
judges
apply
sentencing
factors
whether
factors
lead
sentence
beyond
statutory
maximum
apprendi
application
mandatory
minimum
mean
suggest
approval
mandatory
minimum
sentences
matter
policy
mandatory
minimum
statutes
fundamentally
inconsistent
congress
simultaneous
effort
create
fair
honest
rational
sentencing
system
use
sentencing
guidelines
transfer
sentencing
power
prosecutors
determine
sentences
charges
decide
bring
thereby
reintroduced
much
sentencing
disparity
congress
created
guidelines
eliminate
applying
apprendi
case
however
lead
congress
abolish
modify
statutes
take
judge
power
make
factual
determination
giving
power
juries
prosecutors
legal
consequences
extending
apprendi
also
seriously
adverse
diminish
congress
otherwise
broad
constitutional
authority
define
crimes
specification
elements
shape
criminal
sentences
specification
sentencing
factors
limit
judicial
discretion
applying
factors
particular
cases
pp
kennedy
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
respect
parts
ii
iv
rehnquist
scalia
breyer
joined
opinion
respect
part
iii
rehnquist
scalia
joined
filed
concurring
opinion
breyer
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
joined
william
joseph
harris
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
kennedy
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
respect
parts
ii
iv
opinion
respect
part
iii
chief
justice
justice
justice
scalia
join
consider
distinction
law
drawn
elements
crime
factors
influence
criminal
sentence
legislatures
define
crimes
terms
facts
essential
elements
constitutional
guarantees
attach
facts
federal
prosecutions
person
shall
held
answer
capital
otherwise
infamous
crime
unless
presentment
indictment
grand
jury
alleging
elements
crime
amdt
see
hamling
criminal
prosecutions
state
federal
accused
shall
enjoy
right
trial
impartial
jury
amdt
see
duncan
louisiana
government
must
prove
element
beyond
reasonable
doubt
see
winship
yet
facts
affecting
defendant
punishment
elements
accused
convicted
judge
may
impose
sentence
within
range
provided
statute
basing
various
facts
relating
defendant
manner
offense
committed
though
facts
may
substantial
impact
sentence
elements
thus
subject
constitution
indictment
jury
proof
requirements
statutes
also
direct
judges
give
specific
weight
certain
facts
choosing
sentence
statutes
require
facts
sometimes
referred
sentencing
factors
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
established
beyond
reasonable
doubt
constitution
permits
legislatures
make
distinction
elements
sentencing
factors
imposes
limitations
well
legislatures
evade
indictment
jury
proof
requirements
labeling
almost
every
relevant
fact
sentencing
factor
described
one
limitation
respect
two
terms
ago
apprendi
new
jersey
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
whether
statute
calls
element
sentencing
factor
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
fourteen
years
mcmillan
pennsylvania
declined
adopt
restrictive
constitutional
rule
mcmillan
sustained
statute
increased
minimum
penalty
crime
though
beyond
statutory
maximum
sentencing
judge
found
preponderance
evidence
defendant
possessed
firearm
principal
question
us
whether
mcmillan
stands
apprendi
petitioner
william
joseph
harris
sold
illegal
narcotics
pawnshop
unconcealed
semiautomatic
pistol
side
later
arrested
violating
federal
drug
firearms
laws
including
statute
provides
relevant
part
ny
person
relation
crime
violence
drug
trafficking
crime
uses
carries
firearm
furtherance
crime
possesses
firearm
shall
addition
punishment
provided
crime
violence
drug
trafficking
crime
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
ii
firearm
brandished
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
iii
firearm
discharged
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
government
proceeded
assumption
defines
single
crime
brandishing
sentencing
factor
considered
judge
trial
reason
indictment
said
nothing
brandishing
made
reference
subsection
ii
instead
simply
alleged
elements
statute
principal
paragraph
relation
drug
trafficking
crime
petitioner
knowingly
carr
ied
firearm
bench
trial
district
middle
district
north
carolina
found
petitioner
guilty
charged
following
conviction
presentence
report
recommended
petitioner
given
minimum
brandished
gun
petitioner
objected
citing
decision
jones
arguing
matter
statutory
interpretation
brandishing
element
separate
offense
offense
indicted
tried
sentencing
hearing
district
overruled
objection
found
preponderance
evidence
petitioner
brandished
gun
sentenced
seven
years
prison
appeals
fourth
circuit
petitioner
pressed
statutory
argument
added
brandishing
sentencing
factor
statutory
matter
statute
unconstitutional
light
apprendi
even
though
petitioner
acknowledged
judge
finding
alter
maximum
penalty
exposed
rejecting
arguments
appeals
affirmed
like
every
appeals
addressed
question
held
statute
makes
brandishing
sentencing
factor
accord
barton
carlson
pounds
also
held
constitutional
argument
foreclosed
mcmillan
granted
certiorari
affirm
ii
must
first
answer
threshold
question
statutory
construction
congress
make
brandishing
element
sentencing
factor
government
view
text
question
defines
single
crime
facts
subsections
ii
iii
considerations
sentencing
judge
petitioner
hand
contends
congress
meant
statute
define
three
different
crimes
subsection
ii
says
creates
separate
offense
brandishing
element
petitioner
correct
neither
indicted
tried
offense
minimum
apply
begin
analysis
asking
means
statute
say
many
words
whether
brandishing
element
sentencing
factor
structure
prohibition
suggests
latter
federal
laws
usually
list
offense
elements
single
sentence
separate
sentencing
factors
subsections
castillo
begins
lengthy
principal
paragraph
listing
elements
complete
crime
basic
federal
offense
using
carrying
gun
relation
violent
crime
drug
offense
toward
end
paragraph
word
shall
often
divides
provisions
specify
sentences
jones
following
shall
separate
subsections
explain
defendants
sentenced
subsection
sets
catchall
minimum
certainly
adds
element
ibid
subsections
ii
iii
turn
increase
minimum
penalty
certain
facts
present
subsections
repeat
elements
principal
paragraph
statute
sort
structure
presume
principal
paragraph
defines
single
crime
subsections
identify
sentencing
factors
even
statute
look
suggesting
numbered
subsections
sentencing
provisions
text
might
provide
compelling
evidence
contrary
illustrated
decision
jones
federal
carjacking
statute
similar
structure
interpreted
setting
elements
multiple
offenses
critical
textual
clues
case
however
reinforce
interpretation
implied
statute
structure
tradition
past
congressional
practice
example
perhaps
important
guideposts
jones
fact
issue
serious
bodily
injury
element
numerous
federal
statutes
including
two
carjacking
statute
modeled
jones
doubted
congress
made
fact
sentencing
factor
one
isolated
instance
see
also
castillo
supra
contrast
similar
federal
tradition
treating
brandishing
discharging
offense
elements
castillo
supra
singled
brandishing
paradigmatic
sentencing
factor
traditional
sentencing
factors
often
involve
special
features
manner
basic
crime
carried
defendant
brandished
gun
sentencing
guidelines
moreover
brandishing
discharging
affect
sentences
numerous
federal
crimes
see
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
indeed
guidelines
appear
antecedents
statute
brandishing
provision
term
brandished
appear
federal
provision
save
appear
statute
amended
take
current
form
numbered
subsections
added
describing
sentencing
factors
often
special
features
manner
statute
basic
crime
carried
castillo
supra
thus
seems
likely
brandishing
discharging
meant
serve
function
statute
guidelines
might
reason
question
inference
brandishing
discharging
altered
defendant
punishment
manner
usually
associated
sentencing
factors
jones
instructive
accorded
great
significance
steeply
higher
penalties
authorized
carjacking
statute
three
subsections
enhanced
defendant
maximum
sentence
years
years
life
enhancements
doubted
congress
made
contingent
upon
judicial
factfinding
see
also
castillo
supra
supra
provisions
us
however
effect
defendant
sentence
consistent
traditional
understandings
sentencing
factors
operate
required
findings
constrain
rather
extend
sentencing
judge
discretion
section
authorize
judge
impose
steeply
higher
penalties
higher
penalties
facts
question
found
since
subsections
alter
minimum
judge
may
impose
sentence
well
excess
seven
years
whether
defendant
brandished
firearm
incremental
changes
minimum
years
precisely
one
expect
see
provisions
meant
identify
matters
sentencing
judge
consideration
nothing
text
history
statute
rebuts
presumption
drawn
structure
interpretation
considerations
point
however
petitioner
invokes
canon
constitutional
avoidance
doctrine
statute
susceptible
two
constructions
one
grave
doubtful
constitutional
questions
arise
questions
avoided
duty
adopt
latter
ex
rel
attorney
general
delaware
hudson
least
open
question
petitioner
contends
whether
fifth
sixth
amendments
require
every
fact
increasing
federal
defendant
minimum
sentence
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
avoid
resolving
question
possibly
invalidating
statute
petitioner
urges
read
making
brandishing
element
aggravated
federal
crime
avoidance
canon
played
role
jones
subsections
carjacking
statute
enhanced
maximum
sentence
interpretation
implicated
constitutional
questions
later
addressed
resolved
defendant
favor
apprendi
see
jones
petitioner
proposed
rule
constitution
requires
fact
increasing
statutory
minimum
sentence
accorded
safeguards
assigned
elements
rejected
years
ago
mcmillan
petitioner
acknowledges
much
argues
recent
developments
cast
doubt
mcmillan
viability
avoid
deciding
whether
mcmillan
must
overruled
says
construe
problem
statute
petitioner
suggestion
use
canon
avoid
overruling
one
precedents
novel
given
mcmillan
place
enacted
unsound
avoidance
canon
rests
upon
respect
congress
assume
legislates
light
constitutional
limitations
rust
sullivan
statute
issue
case
passed
mcmillan
provided
controlling
instruction
congress
reason
believe
approaching
constitutional
line
following
instruction
canon
goal
eliminating
friction
coordinate
branch
moreover
alleviated
doubt
constitutional
premise
supplied
adopting
strained
reading
statute
congress
enacted
reliance
premise
stretched
text
avoid
question
mcmillan
continuing
vitality
canon
embrace
dynamic
view
statutory
interpretation
text
might
mean
one
thing
enacted
yet
another
prevailing
view
constitution
later
changed
decline
adopt
approach
avoidance
canon
poses
obstacle
interpretive
circumstances
point
common
direction
conclude
matter
statutory
interpretation
defines
single
offense
statute
regards
brandishing
discharging
sentencing
factors
found
judge
offense
elements
found
jury
iii
confident
statute
mcmillan
said
consider
petitioner
argument
ii
unconstitutional
mcmillan
longer
sound
authority
stare
decisis
inexorable
command
burnet
coronado
oil
gas
brandeis
dissenting
doctrine
fundamental
importance
rule
law
welch
texas
dept
highways
public
even
constitutional
cases
stare
decisis
concerns
less
pronounced
overrule
precedent
absent
special
justification
arizona
rumsey
special
justification
petitioner
offers
decision
apprendi
says
reconciled
mcmillan
cf
ring
arizona
post
overruling
walton
arizona
walton
apprendi
irreconcilable
find
argument
convincing
shall
explain
mcmillan
apprendi
consistent
fundamental
distinction
factual
findings
issue
two
cases
apprendi
said
fact
extending
defendant
sentence
beyond
maximum
authorized
jury
verdict
considered
element
aggravated
crime
thus
domain
jury
framed
bill
rights
said
fact
increasing
mandatory
minimum
extending
sentence
beyond
statutory
maximum
jury
verdict
authorized
judge
impose
minimum
without
finding
mcmillan
recognized
statute
may
reserve
type
factual
finding
judge
without
violating
constitution
though
defining
criminal
conduct
task
generally
left
legislative
branch
patterson
new
york
congress
may
manipulate
definition
crime
way
relieves
government
constitutional
obligations
charge
element
indictment
submit
element
jury
prove
element
beyond
reasonable
doubt
jones
supra
mullaney
wilbur
mcmillan
apprendi
asked
whether
certain
types
facts
though
labeled
sentencing
factors
legislature
nevertheless
traditional
elements
constitutional
safeguards
intended
apply
patterson
new
york
supra
mcmillan
answer
stemmed
certain
historical
doctrinal
understandings
role
judge
sentencing
century
produced
general
shift
country
criminal
statutes
providing
sentences
providing
judges
discretion
within
permissible
range
apprendi
recognized
process
constitutional
facts
taken
consideration
need
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
see
watts
per
curiam
nichols
williams
new
york
reiterated
jones
course
anyone
today
claim
every
fact
bearing
sentencing
must
found
jury
resolved
general
issue
intention
questioning
resolution
judicial
factfinding
course
selecting
sentence
within
authorized
range
implicate
indictment
components
fifth
sixth
amendments
proposition
coupled
another
shift
prevailing
sentencing
practices
explains
mcmillan
latter
part
century
many
legislatures
dissatisfied
sentencing
disparities
among
like
offenders
implemented
measures
regulating
judicial
discretion
systems
maintained
statutory
ranges
judge
factfinding
role
assigned
uniform
weight
factors
judges
often
relied
upon
choosing
sentence
see
payne
tennessee
one
example
reform
kind
addressed
mcmillan
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
pennsylvania
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
act
cons
stat
imposed
minimum
prison
term
five
years
sentencing
judge
found
preponderance
evidence
defendant
possessed
firearm
committing
crime
conviction
sustaining
statute
mcmillan
placed
considerable
reliance
similarity
sentencing
factor
issue
facts
judges
contemplate
exercising
discretion
within
statutory
range
given
latter
elements
crime
explained
neither
former
section
neither
alters
maximum
penalty
crime
committed
creates
separate
offense
calling
separate
penalty
operates
solely
limit
sentencing
discretion
selecting
penalty
within
range
already
available
without
special
finding
visible
possession
firearm
section
ups
ante
defendant
raising
five
years
minimum
sentence
may
imposed
within
statutory
plan
petitioners
claim
visible
possession
pennsylvania
statute
really
element
offenses
punished
least
superficial
appeal
finding
visible
possession
exposed
greater
additional
punishment
omitted
response
argument
act
evaded
constitution
procedural
guarantees
noted
statute
simply
took
one
factor
always
considered
sentencing
courts
bear
punishment
dictated
precise
weight
given
factor
reasoning
still
controls
facts
judges
consider
exercising
discretion
within
statutory
range
elements
become
much
merely
legislatures
require
judge
impose
minimum
sentence
facts
found
sentence
judge
imposed
absent
finding
matter
purposes
constitutional
analysis
statutes
like
pennsylvania
act
state
provides
fact
shall
give
rise
special
stigma
special
punishment
stevens
dissenting
judges
choosing
sentence
within
range
udges
sometimes
necessary
remind
part
state
apprendi
supra
scalia
concurring
facts
though
stigmatizing
punitive
traditional
domain
judges
alleged
indictment
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
reason
believe
framed
fifth
sixth
amendments
thought
elements
crime
conclusion
might
questioned
extensive
historical
evidence
showing
facts
increasing
defendant
minimum
sentence
affecting
maximum
matter
course
treated
elements
evidence
score
however
lacking
statutes
like
pennsylvania
act
alter
minimum
sentence
without
changing
maximum
part
product
century
legislatures
first
asserted
control
sentencing
judge
discretion
courts
founding
whose
views
might
relevant
given
contemporaneous
adoption
bill
rights
see
apprendi
clifford
dissenting
citing
bishop
law
criminal
procedure
ed
formulation
includes
facts
mcmillan
put
alte
maximum
penalty
include
facts
triggering
mandatory
minimum
minimum
may
imposed
without
factual
finding
finding
definition
essential
defendant
punishment
mcmillan
firm
historical
ground
held
legislature
may
specify
condition
mandatory
minimum
without
making
condition
element
crime
fact
visible
firearm
possession
like
facts
considered
judges
selecting
sentence
within
statutory
range
facts
authorities
century
confirm
never
charged
indictment
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ithin
limits
discretion
punishment
law
may
allowed
judge
pronounces
sentence
may
suffer
discretion
influenced
matter
shown
aggravation
mitigation
covered
allegations
indictment
law
permits
heaviest
punishment
scale
laid
inflicted
merely
committed
judge
authority
interpose
mercy
inflict
punishment
lighter
grade
rights
accused
violated
though
indictment
mention
mitigating
circumstances
aggravating
circumstances
spoken
swell
penalty
law
provided
acts
charged
prisoner
interposed
merely
check
judicial
discretion
exercise
permitted
mercy
entirely
different
thing
punishing
one
alleged
bishop
criminal
procedure
since
sentencing
ranges
came
use
defendants
able
predict
face
indictment
precisely
sentence
charged
facts
simply
made
aware
heaviest
punishment
face
convicted
ibid
judges
turn
always
considered
uncharged
aggravating
circumstances
increasing
defendant
punishment
swell
ed
penalty
law
provided
acts
charged
ibid
facts
supporting
mandatory
minimum
fit
squarely
within
description
legislature
choice
entrust
judge
implicate
competition
judge
jury
respective
roles
jones
central
concern
fifth
sixth
amendments
issue
apprendi
contrast
sentencing
factor
swell
penalty
law
provided
bishop
supra
thus
functioned
like
traditional
elemen
patterson
new
york
defendant
convicted
illegal
possession
firearm
offense
new
jersey
law
prescribed
maximum
years
prison
see
stat
ann
sentenced
years
however
separate
statute
permitted
enhancement
judge
found
preponderance
evidence
defendant
acted
purpose
intimidate
individual
group
individuals
race
supp
held
enhancement
unconstitutional
ur
cases
area
history
upon
rely
observed
confirmed
constitutional
principle
first
identified
jones
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
facts
apprendi
held
framers
mind
spoke
crimes
criminal
prosecutions
fifth
sixth
amendments
crime
alleged
criminal
prosecution
complete
unless
indictment
jury
verdict
included
facts
legislature
attached
maximum
punishment
fact
exposes
criminal
defendant
penalty
exceeding
maximum
receive
punished
according
facts
reflected
jury
verdict
alone
concluded
prevailing
historical
practice
element
aggravated
offense
see
see
also
thomas
concurring
apprendi
conclusions
undermine
mcmillan
comparable
historical
practice
submitting
facts
increasing
mandatory
minimum
jury
apprendi
rule
extend
facts
indeed
made
clear
holding
affect
mcmillan
overrule
mcmillan
limit
holding
cases
involve
imposition
sentence
severe
statutory
maximum
offense
established
jury
verdict
limitation
identified
mcmillan
opinion
sentencing
factor
mcmillan
increase
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
concurring
opinions
jones
put
alter
congressionally
prescribed
range
penalties
criminal
defendant
exposed
scalia
concurring
apprendi
observed
mcmillan
finding
merely
required
judge
impose
specific
sentence
within
range
authorized
jury
finding
defendant
guilty
see
also
jones
supra
winship
issue
mcmillan
rose
provision
judge
finding
preponderance
visible
possession
firearm
require
mandatory
minimum
sentence
certain
felonies
minimum
fell
within
sentencing
ranges
otherwise
prescribed
holding
history
based
suggest
apprendi
understanding
constitution
consistent
holding
mcmillan
facts
extending
sentence
beyond
statutory
maximum
traditionally
charged
indictment
submitted
jury
apprendi
said
function
indictment
jury
authorize
state
impose
punishment
evidence
punishment
law
tied
offense
evidence
american
judges
exercised
sentencing
discretion
within
legally
prescribed
range
point
single
consistent
conclusion
judge
role
sentencing
constrained
outer
limits
facts
alleged
indictment
found
jury
put
simply
facts
expose
defendant
punishment
greater
otherwise
legally
prescribed
definition
elements
separate
legal
offense
grand
petit
juries
thus
form
strong
barrier
liberties
people
prerogative
government
duncan
louisiana
quoting
blackstone
commentaries
laws
england
cooley
ed
absent
authorization
trial
jury
form
finding
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
facts
warranting
extended
sentence
new
jersey
statute
state
power
sentence
defendant
years
maximum
authorized
jury
guilty
verdict
apprendi
hose
facts
determine
maximum
sentence
law
allows
necessarily
elements
crime
scalia
concurring
yet
jury
finds
facts
apprendi
says
defendant
convicted
crime
fifth
sixth
amendments
observed
government
authorized
impose
sentence
maximum
apprendi
noted
nothing
history
suggests
impermissible
judges
exercise
discretion
taking
consideration
various
factors
relating
offense
offender
imposing
judgment
within
range
also
mcmillan
noted
nothing
history
suggests
impermissible
judges
find
facts
give
rise
mandatory
minimum
sentence
maximum
penalty
crime
committed
instances
judicial
factfinding
expose
defendant
punishment
greater
otherwise
legally
prescribed
apprendi
supra
whether
chosen
judge
legislature
facts
guiding
judicial
discretion
statutory
maximum
need
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
judge
sentences
defendant
mandatory
minimum
less
judge
chooses
sentence
within
range
grand
petit
juries
already
found
facts
necessary
authorize
government
impose
sentence
judge
may
impose
minimum
maximum
sentence
within
range
without
seeking
authorization
juries
without
contradicting
apprendi
petitioner
argues
however
concerns
underlying
apprendi
apply
equal
force
facts
increasing
defendant
minimum
sentence
factual
findings
contends
often
greater
impact
defendant
findings
issue
apprendi
fact
increasing
statutory
maximum
found
judge
may
still
impose
sentence
far
maximum
fact
increasing
minimum
found
judge
choice
impose
minimum
even
otherwise
chosen
lower
sentence
cf
petitioner
asks
fairness
also
require
latter
sort
fact
alleged
indictment
found
jury
standard
answer
beyond
dispute
judge
choice
sentences
within
authorized
range
may
influenced
facts
considered
jury
factual
finding
practical
effect
control
constitutional
analysis
fifth
sixth
amendments
ensure
defendant
never
get
punishment
bargained
crime
promise
receive
anything
less
apprendi
supra
scalia
concurring
grand
jury
alleged
trial
jury
found
facts
necessary
impose
maximum
barriers
government
defendant
fall
judge
may
select
sentence
within
range
based
facts
alleged
indictment
proved
jury
even
facts
specified
legislature
even
persuade
judge
choose
much
higher
sentence
otherwise
imposed
fact
affects
defendant
sentence
even
dramatically
make
element
light
foregoing
surprising
decisions
apprendi
jones
insisted
consistent
mcmillan
distinction
drawn
facts
increasing
defendant
minimum
sentence
facts
extending
sentence
beyond
statutory
maximum
see
apprendi
supra
term
sentencing
factor
appropriately
describes
circumstance
may
either
aggravating
mitigating
character
supports
specific
sentence
within
range
authorized
jury
finding
defendant
guilty
particular
offense
jones
mcmillan
recognizes
question
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
jury
guarantee
sixth
ay
judicial
factfinding
preponderance
support
application
provision
increases
potential
severity
penalty
variant
given
crime
see
also
supra
scalia
dissenting
one
read
mcmillan
without
perceiving
determinative
element
validation
pennsylvania
statute
fact
merely
limited
sentencing
judge
discretion
within
range
penalty
already
available
rather
substantially
increasing
available
sentence
distinction
may
continue
stand
factual
finding
apprendi
extended
power
judge
allowing
impose
punishment
exceeding
authorized
jury
finding
mcmillan
restrained
judge
power
limiting
choices
within
authorized
range
quite
consistent
maintain
former
type
fact
must
submitted
jury
latter
need
read
together
mcmillan
apprendi
mean
facts
setting
outer
limits
sentence
judicial
power
impose
elements
crime
purposes
constitutional
analysis
within
range
authorized
jury
verdict
however
political
system
may
channel
judicial
discretion
rely
upon
judicial
expertise
requiring
defendants
serve
minimum
terms
judges
make
certain
factual
findings
critical
abandon
understanding
late
date
legislatures
constituents
relied
upon
mcmillan
exercise
control
sentencing
dozens
statutes
like
one
approved
case
congress
conditioned
mandatory
minimum
sentences
upon
judicial
findings
firearm
possessed
brandished
discharged
code
stat
ann
stat
ann
supp
stat
ann
among
examples
victim
years
age
cons
stat
defendant
possessed
certain
quantity
drugs
comp
ch
victim
related
defendant
alaska
stat
defendant
repeat
offender
md
ann
code
art
supp
see
reason
overturn
statutes
cast
uncertainty
upon
sentences
imposed
iv
reaffirming
mcmillan
employing
approach
outlined
case
conclude
federal
provision
issue
ii
constitutional
basing
increase
defendant
minimum
sentence
judicial
finding
brandishing
evade
requirements
fifth
sixth
amendments
congress
simply
took
one
factor
always
considered
sentencing
courts
bear
punishment
dictated
precise
weight
given
factor
mcmillan
factor
need
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
well
aware
many
question
wisdom
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
mandatory
minimums
often
said
fail
account
unique
circumstances
offenders
warrant
lesser
penalty
see
brief
families
mandatory
minimums
foundation
amicus
curiae
cf
supra
citing
sentencing
commission
mandatory
minimum
penalties
federal
criminal
justice
system
criticisms
may
sound
persist
whether
judge
jury
found
facts
giving
rise
minimum
hold
constitution
permits
judge
leave
questions
congress
democratic
processes
judgment
appeals
affirmed
ordered
william
joseph
harris
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
concurring
petitioner
bases
statutory
argument
brandishing
must
interpreted
offense
element
jones
bases
constitutional
argument
regardless
statute
interpreted
brandishing
must
charged
indictment
found
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
apprendi
new
jersey
dissented
jones
apprendi
still
believe
wrongly
decided
find
easy
reject
petitioner
arguments
even
assuming
validity
jones
apprendi
however
agree
petitioner
arguments
brandishing
must
charged
indictment
found
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
unavailing
therefore
join
justice
kennedy
opinion
entirety
william
joseph
harris
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
breyer
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
easily
distinguish
apprendi
new
jersey
case
terms
logic
reason
agree
plurality
opinion
insofar
finds
distinction
time
continue
believe
sixth
amendment
permits
judges
apply
sentencing
factors
whether
factors
lead
sentence
beyond
statutory
maximum
apprendi
application
mandatory
minimum
believe
extending
apprendi
mandatory
minimums
adverse
practical
well
legal
consequences
yet
accept
rule
therefore
join
judgment
join
opinion
extent
holds
apprendi
apply
mandatory
minimums
saying
mean
suggest
approval
mandatory
minimum
sentences
matter
policy
past
two
decades
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
statutes
proliferated
number
importance
judges
legislators
lawyers
commentators
criticized
statutes
arguing
negatively
affect
fair
administration
criminal
law
matter
concern
judges
legislators
alike
see
remarks
chief
justice
william
rehnquist
nat
symposium
drugs
violence
america
june
kennedy
hearings
subcommittee
house
committee
appropriations
mar
mandatory
minimums
imprudent
unwise
often
unjust
mechanism
sentencing
breyer
federal
sentencing
guidelines
revisited
crim
justice
spring
hatch
role
congress
sentencing
sentencing
commission
mandatory
minimum
sentences
search
certain
effective
sentencing
system
wake
forest
rev
schulhofer
rethinking
mandatory
minimums
wake
forest
rev
raeder
rethinking
sentencing
correctional
policy
nonviolent
drug
offenders
crim
justice
summer
noting
american
bar
association
opposed
mandatory
minimum
sentences
since
mandatory
minimum
statutes
fundamentally
inconsistent
congress
simultaneous
effort
create
fair
honest
rational
sentencing
system
use
sentencing
guidelines
unlike
guideline
sentences
statutory
mandatory
minimums
generally
deny
judge
legal
power
depart
downward
matter
unusual
special
circumstances
call
leniency
see
melendez
breyer
concurring
part
dissenting
part
cf
koon
rarely
reflect
effort
achieve
sentencing
proportionality
key
element
sentencing
fairness
demands
law
punish
drug
kingpin
mule
differently
transfer
sentencing
power
prosecutors
determine
sentences
charges
decide
bring
thereby
reintroduced
much
sentencing
disparity
congress
created
guidelines
eliminate
sentencing
special
report
congress
mandatory
minimum
penalties
federal
criminal
justice
system
sentencing
report
see
also
schulhofer
supra
rarely
based
upon
empirical
study
see
rehnquist
supra
hatch
supra
evidence
encourage
subterfuge
leading
frequent
downward
departures
random
basis
thereby
making
comparatively
ineffective
means
guaranteeing
tough
sentences
see
sentencing
report
applying
apprendi
case
however
lead
congress
abolish
modify
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
statutes
rather
simply
require
prosecutor
charge
jury
find
beyond
reasonable
doubt
existence
factor
say
amount
unlawful
drugs
triggers
mandatory
minimum
many
cases
defendant
claiming
innocence
arguing
say
mistaken
identity
find
impossible
simultaneously
argue
jury
prosecutor
overstated
drug
amount
jury
might
ask
innocent
defendant
know
anything
matter
upshot
many
cases
defendant
prosecutor
enter
stipulation
trial
drug
amounts
used
sentencing
jury
finds
defendant
guilty
extent
application
apprendi
take
judge
power
make
factual
determination
giving
power
juries
prosecutors
consequences
viewed
prism
open
fair
sentencing
system
seriously
adverse
legal
consequences
extending
apprendi
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
context
also
seriously
adverse
diminish
congress
otherwise
broad
constitutional
authority
define
crimes
specification
elements
shape
criminal
sentences
specification
sentencing
factors
limit
judicial
discretion
applying
factors
particular
cases
discussed
matters
fully
apprendi
dissent
see
kennedy
dissenting
apply
apprendi
case
consequently
join
parts
ii
iv
opinion
concur
judgment
william
joseph
harris
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
thomas
justice
stevens
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
join
dissenting
range
punishment
petitioner
william
harris
exposed
turned
fact
brandished
firearm
fact
neither
charged
indictment
proved
trial
beyond
reasonable
doubt
appeals
fourth
circuit
nonetheless
held
reliance
mcmillan
pennsylvania
fact
harris
brandished
firearm
mere
sentencing
factor
constitutional
protections
attach
mcmillan
however
conflicts
later
decision
apprendi
new
jersey
dissenting
opinion
apprendi
recognized
see
dissenting
holding
today
therefore
rests
either
misunderstanding
rejection
principles
animated
apprendi
two
years
ago
given
considerations
stare
decisis
nadir
cases
involving
procedural
rules
implicating
fundamental
constitutional
protections
afforded
criminal
defendants
reaffirm
apprendi
overrule
mcmillan
reverse
appeals
harris
indicted
distributing
marijuana
violation
carrying
firearm
relation
drug
trafficking
crime
violation
harris
pleaded
guilty
distributing
marijuana
disputed
carried
firearm
relation
drug
trafficking
crime
district
convicted
judge
waived
right
trial
jury
although
mandatory
minimum
prison
sentence
five
years
prison
presentence
report
relied
ii
increases
mandatory
minimum
prison
sentence
seven
years
firearm
sentencing
district
acknowledged
close
question
whether
harris
brandished
firearm
noted
thing
happened
gun
drug
transaction
app
district
nonetheless
found
preponderance
evidence
harris
brandished
firearm
result
sentenced
minimum
mandatory
sentence
seven
years
imprisonment
violation
relying
mcmillan
appeals
affirmed
sentence
held
matter
statutory
interpretation
brandishing
sentencing
factor
element
offense
accordingly
appeals
concluded
allegation
brandishing
firearm
need
charged
indictment
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
order
mandatory
minimum
triggered
ii
construes
defin
single
offense
ante
rather
multiple
offenses
found
similarly
structured
statute
jones
reliance
mcmillan
discounts
increasing
mandatory
minimum
sentences
set
forth
statutory
provision
constitutionally
irrelevant
plurality
view
punishment
less
statutory
maximum
life
imprisonment
violation
avoids
single
principle
gleans
apprendi
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
whether
statute
calls
element
sentencing
factor
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ante
quoting
apprendi
supra
according
plurality
historical
practices
underlying
decision
apprendi
respect
penalties
exceed
statutory
maximum
support
extension
apprendi
rule
facts
increase
defendant
mandatory
minimum
sentence
fine
distinctions
regard
vital
constitutional
liberties
withstand
close
scrutiny
federal
constitution
provides
accused
federal
courts
specific
rights
right
informed
nature
cause
accusation
right
held
answer
capital
otherwise
infamous
crime
indictment
presentment
grand
jury
right
tried
impartial
jury
state
district
wherein
crime
shall
committed
amdts
also
member
disputes
due
process
requires
every
fact
necessary
constitute
crime
must
found
beyond
reasonable
doubt
jury
right
waived
see
winship
apprendi
case
thus
turns
seemingly
simple
question
constitutes
crime
question
answered
reference
statutory
construction
alone
solely
sentence
exceed
statutory
maximum
discussed
great
length
apprendi
original
understanding
facts
elements
crime
expansive
legislature
defines
core
crime
provides
increasing
punishment
crime
upon
finding
aggravating
fact
whatever
sort
including
fact
prior
conviction
core
crime
aggravating
fact
together
constitute
aggravated
crime
much
grand
larceny
aggravated
form
petit
larceny
aggravating
fact
element
aggravated
crime
similarly
legislature
rather
creating
grades
crimes
provided
setting
punishment
crime
based
fact
fact
also
element
multifactor
parsing
statutes
sort
attempted
since
mcmillan
necessary
one
need
look
kind
degree
range
punishment
prosecution
law
entitled
given
set
facts
fact
entitlement
element
concurring
opinion
fact
defendant
brandished
firearm
indisputably
alters
prescribed
range
penalties
exposed
without
finding
defendant
brandished
discharged
firearm
penalty
range
conviction
five
years
life
prison
finding
defendant
brandished
firearm
penalty
range
becomes
harsher
seven
years
life
imprisonment
ii
finds
defendant
discharged
firearm
range
becomes
even
severe
years
life
iii
thus
ultimately
beside
point
whether
matter
statutory
interpretation
brandishing
sentencing
factor
constitutional
matter
brandishing
must
deemed
element
aggravated
offense
see
apprendi
supra
acts
expose
defendant
punishment
greater
otherwise
legally
prescribed
definition
elements
separate
legal
offense
agree
legislature
free
decree
within
constitutional
limits
facts
elements
constitute
crime
see
ante
legislature
provides
particular
fact
shall
give
rise
special
stigma
special
punishment
ante
plurality
opinion
quoting
mcmillan
stevens
dissenting
constitutional
consequences
clear
acknowledged
apprendi
society
long
recognized
necessary
link
punishment
crime
defendant
ability
predict
certainty
judgment
face
felony
indictment
flowed
invariable
linkage
punishment
crime
link
makes
great
deal
sense
anyone
care
convicted
murder
opposed
manslaughter
increased
penalties
former
offense
turn
reflect
greater
moral
opprobrium
society
attaches
act
made
clear
apprendi
statute
annexes
higher
degree
based
certain
circumstances
exposing
defendant
higher
degree
punishment
requires
circumstances
charged
indictment
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
quoting
archbold
pleading
evidence
criminal
cases
ed
constitutional
limitation
neither
interferes
legislature
ability
define
statutory
ranges
punishment
calls
question
judicial
discretion
impose
judgment
within
range
prescribed
statute
apprendi
protect
criminal
defendant
constitutional
right
know
ex
ante
circumstances
determine
applicable
range
punishment
circumstances
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
defendant
faces
punishment
beyond
provided
statute
offense
committed
certain
circumstances
others
obvious
loss
liberty
stigma
attaching
offense
heightened
necessarily
follows
defendant
moment
state
put
proof
circumstances
deprived
protections
point
unquestionably
attached
truncates
protection
holds
facts
sometimes
referred
sentencing
factors
need
alleged
indictment
submitted
jury
established
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ante
long
increase
penalty
crime
beyond
statutory
maximum
even
fact
alters
statutorily
mandated
sentencing
range
increasing
mandatory
minimum
sentence
say
effect
claim
imposition
rather
mandatory
minimum
change
constitutionally
relevant
sentence
range
regardless
either
sentence
falls
five
years
statutory
maximum
life
longest
sentence
range
available
statute
analysis
flawed
precisely
statute
provides
incremental
sentencing
ranges
mandatory
minimum
sentence
varies
upward
defendant
brandished
discharged
weapon
matter
common
sense
increased
mandatory
minimum
heightens
loss
liberty
represents
increased
stigma
society
attaches
offense
consequently
facts
trigger
increased
mandatory
minimum
sentence
warrant
constitutional
safeguards
actual
sentencing
practices
appear
bolster
conclusion
suggestion
sentence
imposed
even
without
finding
defendant
brandished
firearm
ignores
fact
sentence
imposed
defendant
found
carried
firearm
relation
drug
trafficking
offense
appears
almost
uniformly
invariably
five
years
similarly
found
brandished
firearm
typically
always
sentenced
years
prison
found
discharged
firearm
sentenced
years
cf
sentencing
commission
datafile
table
illustrating
almost
persons
sentenced
violations
sentenced
years
imprisonment
true
even
though
anyone
convicted
violating
theoretically
eligible
receive
sentence
severe
life
yet
decision
today
key
facts
actually
responsible
fixing
defendant
punishment
need
charged
indictment
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
incremental
increase
five
seven
years
prison
may
seem
great
abstract
course
must
seem
quite
different
defendant
actually
incarcerated
however
constitutional
analysis
adopted
plurality
hold
equally
true
mandatory
minimum
violation
without
brandishing
five
years
mandatory
minimum
brandishing
life
imprisonment
result
must
surely
fundamental
constitutional
principles
alter
depending
degrees
sentencing
severity
long
clear
congress
intended
brandishing
sentencing
factor
fact
still
neither
charged
indictment
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
case
apprendi
easily
avoided
clever
statutory
drafting
true
apprendi
concerned
fact
increased
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
principles
upon
relied
apply
equal
force
facts
expose
defendant
higher
mandatory
minimum
fact
exposes
defendant
greater
punishment
otherwise
legally
prescribed
fact
definition
elemen
separate
legal
offense
whether
one
raises
floor
raises
ceiling
impossible
dispute
defendant
exposed
greater
punishment
otherwise
prescribed
less
true
mandatory
minimum
sentences
phenomena
government
acknowledged
oral
argument
fact
means
historical
practice
directly
dispositive
question
whether
facts
triggering
mandatory
minimums
must
treated
like
elements
tr
oral
arg
previously
suggested
constitutional
protection
ends
legislative
innovation
ingenuity
begins
looking
principles
animated
decision
apprendi
bases
historical
practice
upon
apprendi
rested
rather
historical
pedigree
mandatory
minimums
logical
grounds
treating
facts
triggering
mandatory
minimums
differently
facts
increase
statutory
maximum
either
case
defendant
predict
judgment
face
felony
see
absolute
statutory
limits
punishment
change
constituting
increased
penalty
either
case
defendant
must
afforded
procedural
protections
notice
jury
trial
heightened
standard
proof
respect
facts
warranting
exposure
greater
penalty
see
jones
scalia
concurring
iii
mcmillan
rested
premise
applicability
standard
always
dependent
state
defines
offense
charged
given
case
thus
withstand
logic
apprendi
least
respect
facts
legislature
prescribed
new
statutory
sentencing
range
mcmillan
broke
traditional
understanding
crime
definition
tradition
continued
well
century
least
middle
century
apprendi
supra
thomas
concurring
mcmillan
therefore
acknowledge
change
prescribed
sentence
range
upon
finding
particular
facts
changed
prescribed
range
penalties
constitutionally
significant
way
rather
recognizing
applicable
due
process
limits
concluded
mandatory
minimum
issue
increase
prescribed
range
penalties
merely
required
judge
impose
specific
penalty
within
range
already
available
discussed
supra
analysis
inherently
flawed
jones
called
question
apprendi
firmly
limited
related
precept
underlying
mcmillan
namely
state
authority
treat
aggravated
behavior
factor
increasing
sentence
rather
element
crime
although
plurality
resurrects
principle
see
ante
must
face
contrary
conclusion
apprendi
adopts
position
taken
dissent
mcmillan
state
provides
specific
component
prohibited
transaction
shall
give
rise
special
stigma
special
punishment
component
must
treated
fact
necessary
constitute
crime
within
meaning
holding
winship
stevens
dissenting
see
apprendi
supra
stare
decisis
dictate
outcome
case
stare
decisis
effect
mcmillan
considerably
weakened
variety
reasons
initial
matter
wrongly
decided
constitutional
question
force
stare
decisis
weakest
see
ring
arizona
post
agostini
felton
relationship
punishment
constitutional
protections
attached
elements
crime
traces
roots
back
common
law
mcmillan
decided
years
appeals
let
alone
held
apprendi
retroactive
effect
concedes
respect
prospective
application
charge
facts
upon
mandatory
minimum
sentence
based
indictment
prove
jury
tr
oral
arg
consequently
one
hard
pressed
give
credence
plurality
suggestion
critical
abandon
mcmillan
late
date
ante
rather
imperative
maintain
absolute
fidelity
protections
individual
afforded
notice
trial
jury
requirements
finally
today
one
seriously
believed
earlier
decision
mcmillan
coexist
logical
implications
later
decisions
apprendi
jones
cases
dissent
said
much
essential
holding
mcmillan
conflicts
least
two
several
formulations
gives
rule
announces
today
first
endorses
following
principle
unconstitutional
legislature
remove
jury
assessment
facts
increase
prescribed
range
penalties
criminal
defendant
exposed
equally
clear
facts
must
established
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ante
emphasis
added
quoting
jones
supra
stevens
concurring
second
endorses
rule
restated
justice
scalia
concurring
opinion
jones
see
ante
justice
scalia
wrote
unconstitutional
remove
jury
assessment
facts
alter
congressionally
prescribed
range
penalties
criminal
defendant
exposed
jones
supra
emphasis
added
thus
appears
hold
fact
increases
alters
range
penalties
defendant
exposed
definition
must
include
increases
alterations
either
minimum
maximum
penalties
must
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
mcmillan
however
rejected
rule
extent
concerned
facts
increase
alter
minimum
penalty
defendant
exposed
accordingly
incumbent
admit
overruling
mcmillan
also
explain
course
action
appropriate
normal
principles
stare
decisis
apprendi
dissenting
see
also
jones
supporting
essential
incompatibility
apprendi
mcmillan
justice
breyer
concurs
judgment
entire
opinion
recognizing
easily
distinguish
apprendi
case
terms
logic
reason
agree
plurality
opinion
insofar
finds
distinction
ante
breyer
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
leaves
minority
embracing
distinction
mcmillan
apprendi
forms
basis
today
holding
least
one
member
explicitly
continues
reject
apprendi
jones
ante
concurring
conscious
likelihood
legislative
decisions
may
made
reliance
mcmillan
apprendi
reserve
another
day
question
whether
stare
decisis
considerations
preclude
reconsideration
narrower
holding
day
come
adherence
stare
decisis
case
require
infidelity
constitutional
values
like
members
logically
distinguish
issue
principles
underlying
decision
apprendi
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
harris
owned
pawn
shop
routinely
wore
gun
work
district
accepted
harris
ordinary
practice
wear
gun
whether
selling
small
amounts
marijuana
friends
district
however
determined
gun
carried
relation
drug
trafficking
offense
within
meaning
unable
draw
distinction
carried
legitimate
purpose
illegitimate
purpose
app
presentence
report
recommended
harris
given
term
imprisonment
zero
six
months
distribution
charge
see
indeed
certainty
virtually
every
instance
sentence
imposed
violation
tied
directly
applicable
mandatory
minimum
see
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
stating
clearly
guideline
sentence
defendant
convicted
minimum
term
required
relevant
statute
sentence
minimum
term
upward
departure
mandatory
minimum
sentence
schemes
phenomena
fairly
recent
vintage
genesis
see
ante
see
also
apprendi
new
jersey
thomas
concurring
fact
fair
say
mcmillan
began
revolution
law
regarding
definition
crime
today
decision
far
sharp
break
past
marks
nothing
return
status
quo
ante
status
quo
reflected
original
meaning
fifth
sixth
amendments