southern
union
argued
march
decided
june
petitioner
southern
union
company
convicted
jury
federal
one
count
violating
resource
conservation
recovery
act
rcra
knowingly
stored
liquid
mercury
without
permit
subsidiary
facility
september
october
violations
rcra
punishable
inter
alia
fine
day
violation
sentencing
probation
office
calculated
maximum
fine
million
basis
southern
union
violated
rcra
days
september
october
southern
union
argued
imposing
fine
greater
penalty
unconstitutional
apprendi
new
jersey
holds
sixth
amendment
guarantee
requires
fact
fact
prior
conviction
increases
maximum
punishment
authorized
particular
crime
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
southern
union
contended
based
jury
verdict
district
instructions
violation
jury
necessarily
found
one
day
district
held
apprendi
applies
criminal
fines
concluded
content
context
verdict
together
jury
found
violation
therefore
set
maximum
potential
fine
million
imposed
fine
million
community
service
obligation
million
appeal
first
circuit
disagreed
district
jury
necessarily
found
violation
days
first
circuit
affirmed
sentence
held
apprendi
apply
criminal
fines
held
rule
apprendi
applies
imposition
criminal
fines
pp
apprendi
rule
rooted
longstanding
practice
cunningham
california
preserves
historic
jury
function
determining
whether
prosecution
proved
element
offense
beyond
reasonable
doubt
oregon
ice
repeatedly
affirmed
apprendi
rule
applying
variety
sentencing
schemes
allow
judges
find
facts
increase
defendant
maximum
authorized
sentence
see
cunningham
booker
blakely
washington
ring
arizona
punishments
stake
cases
imprisonment
death
sentence
principled
basis
apprendi
treat
criminal
fines
differently
apprendi
core
concern
reserve
jury
determination
facts
warrant
punishment
specific
statutory
offense
ice
applies
whether
sentence
criminal
fine
imprisonment
death
criminal
fines
like
forms
punishment
penalties
inflicted
sovereign
commission
offenses
fines
far
common
form
noncapital
punishment
colonial
america
continue
frequently
imposed
today
amount
fine
like
maximum
term
imprisonment
eligibility
death
penalty
often
determined
reference
particular
facts
government
argues
fines
less
onerous
incarceration
death
sentence
therefore
exempt
apprendi
fine
substantial
enough
trigger
sixth
amendment
guarantee
apprendi
applies
full
pp
historical
role
jury
common
law
informs
scope
constitutional
jury
right
ice
supports
applying
apprendi
criminal
fines
sure
judges
colonies
founding
era
much
discretion
determining
whether
impose
fine
amount
exercise
discretion
fully
consistent
apprendi
permits
courts
impose
judgment
within
range
prescribed
statute
emphasis
original
salient
question
role
jury
played
prosecutions
offenses
pegged
amount
fine
determination
specified
facts
review
state
federal
decisions
discloses
predominant
practice
facts
alleged
indictment
proved
jury
rule
juries
must
determine
facts
set
fine
maximum
amount
application
two
longstanding
tenets
criminal
jurisprudence
apprendi
based
first
every
accusation
defendant
afterwards
confirmed
unanimous
suffrage
twelve
equals
neighbours
blakely
second
accusation
lacks
particular
fact
law
makes
essential
punishment
accusation
within
requirements
common
law
accusation
reason
ibid
contrary
government
contentions
neither
murphy
pet
tyler
cranch
overcomes
ample
historical
evidence
juries
routinely
found
facts
set
maximum
criminal
fines
pp
government
remaining
arguments
echoed
dissent
unpersuasive
government
claims
facts
relevant
fine
amount
typically
quantify
harm
caused
defendant
offense
define
separate
set
acts
punishment
government
contends
latter
determination
implicates
apprendi
concerns
argument
rests
rejected
assumption
determining
maximum
punishment
offense
constitutionally
significant
difference
fact
element
offense
one
sentencing
factor
facts
district
found
imposing
fine
southern
union
fairly
characterized
merely
quantifying
harm
company
caused
government
also
argues
applying
apprendi
criminal
fines
prevent
federal
government
enacting
statutes
calibrate
amount
fine
defendant
legislatures
free
enact
statutes
long
statutes
administered
conformance
sixth
amendment
finally
government
contends
requiring
juries
determine
facts
related
fines
cause
confusion
prejudice
defendants
impractical
policy
arguments
rehearse
made
dissents
prior
apprendi
cases
must
rejected
rule
government
espouses
unconstitutional
addition
apprendi
decade
old
reliance
interests
underlying
government
arguments
point
attenuated
pp
reversed
remanded
sotomayor
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
thomas
ginsburg
kagan
joined
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
kennedy
alito
joined
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
southern
union
company
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
june
justice
sotomayor
delivered
opinion
sixth
amendment
reserves
juries
determination
fact
fact
prior
conviction
increases
criminal
defendant
maximum
potential
sentence
apprendi
new
jersey
blakely
washington
applied
principle
numerous
cases
sentence
imprisonment
death
question
whether
rule
applies
sentences
criminal
fines
hold
petitioner
southern
union
company
natural
gas
distributor
subsidiary
stored
liquid
mercury
hazardous
substance
facility
pawtucket
rhode
september
youths
nearby
apartment
complex
broke
facility
played
spread
around
facility
complex
complex
residents
temporarily
displaced
cleanup
underwent
testing
mercury
poisoning
grand
jury
indicted
southern
union
multiple
counts
violating
federal
environmental
statutes
relevant
first
count
alleged
company
knowingly
stored
liquid
mercury
without
permit
pawtucket
facility
rom
september
october
app
violation
resource
conservation
recovery
act
rcra
see
stat
amended
jury
convicted
southern
union
count
following
trial
district
district
rhode
island
verdict
form
stated
southern
union
guilty
unlawfully
storing
liquid
mercury
september
october
app
violations
rcra
punishable
inter
alia
fine
day
violation
sentencing
probation
office
set
maximum
fine
million
basis
southern
union
violated
rcra
days
september
october
southern
union
objected
calculation
violated
apprendi
jury
asked
determine
precise
duration
violation
company
noted
form
listed
violation
approximate
start
date
argued
instructions
permitted
conviction
jury
found
even
violation
therefore
southern
union
maintained
violation
jury
necessarily
found
one
day
imposing
fine
greater
penalty
require
factfinding
contravention
apprendi
government
acknowledged
jury
asked
specify
duration
violation
argued
apprendi
apply
criminal
fines
district
disagreed
held
apprendi
applies
concluded
content
context
verdict
together
jury
found
violation
app
pet
cert
therefore
set
maximum
potential
fine
million
imposed
fine
million
community
service
obligatio
million
app
appeal
appeals
first
circuit
rejected
district
conclusion
jury
necessarily
found
violation
days
appeals
affirmed
sentence
also
held
contrast
district
apprendi
apply
criminal
fines
circuits
reached
opposite
conclusion
see
pfaff
per
curiam
lagrou
distribution
granted
certiorari
resolve
conflict
reverse
ii
case
requires
us
consider
scope
sixth
amendment
right
jury
trial
construed
apprendi
apprendi
ther
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
maximum
apprendi
purposes
maximum
sentence
judge
may
impose
solely
basis
facts
reflected
jury
verdict
admitted
defendant
blakely
emphasis
deleted
thus
judges
may
exercise
discretion
sentencing
may
inflic
punishment
jury
verdict
alone
allow
apprendi
rule
rooted
longstanding
practice
cunningham
california
preserves
historic
jury
function
determining
whether
prosecution
proved
element
offense
beyond
reasonable
doubt
oregon
ice
repeatedly
affirmed
rule
applying
variety
sentencing
schemes
allowed
judges
find
facts
increased
defendant
maximum
authorized
sentence
see
cunningham
elevated
upper
term
booker
increased
imprisonment
range
defendant
federal
sentencing
guidelines
blakely
increased
statutorily
prescribed
standard
range
ring
arizona
death
penalty
authorized
upon
finding
existence
aggravating
factors
apprendi
extended
term
imprisonment
based
violation
hate
crime
statute
punishments
stake
cases
imprisonment
death
sentence
see
principled
basis
apprendi
treating
criminal
fines
apprendi
core
concern
reserve
jury
determination
facts
warrant
punishment
specific
statutory
offense
ice
concern
applies
whether
sentence
criminal
fine
imprisonment
death
criminal
fines
like
forms
punishment
penalties
inflicted
sovereign
commission
offenses
fines
far
common
form
noncapital
punishment
colonial
frequently
imposed
today
especially
upon
organizational
defendants
amount
fine
like
maximum
term
imprisonment
eligibility
death
penalty
calculated
reference
particular
facts
sometimes
fact
duration
statutory
violation
statutes
amount
defendant
gain
victim
loss
cases
requiring
juries
find
beyond
reasonable
doubt
facts
determine
fine
maximum
amount
necessary
implement
apprendi
animating
principle
preservation
jury
historic
role
bulwark
state
accused
trial
alleged
offense
ice
stating
apprendi
rule
never
distinguished
one
form
punishment
another
instead
decisions
broadly
prohibit
judicial
factfinding
increases
maximum
criminal
sentence
penalties
punishment
terms
undeniably
embrace
fines
blakely
apprendi
ring
government
objects
however
fines
less
onerous
incarceration
death
sentence
government
notes
apprendi
referred
physical
deprivation
liberty
imprisonment
occasions
see
placed
weight
imprisonment
fines
construing
scope
sixth
amendment
rights
counsel
jury
trial
see
blanton
north
las
vegas
jury
trial
scott
illinois
counsel
therefore
government
concludes
fines
categorically
implicate
primary
concerns
motivating
apprendi
brief
argument
fails
conclusion
premise
fine
insubstantial
underlying
offense
considered
petty
sixth
amendment
right
jury
trial
triggered
apprendi
issue
arises
see
muniz
hoffman
fine
imposed
labor
union
entitle
union
jury
trial
see
also
blanton
jury
trial
right
petty
offenses
measured
severity
maximum
authorized
penalty
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
course
true
offenses
punishable
relatively
brief
terms
imprisonment
entitle
defendant
jury
trial
see
establishing
rebuttable
presumption
offenses
punishable
six
months
imprisonment
less
petty
duncan
louisiana
fines
insubstantial
offenses
punishable
fines
petty
see
mine
workers
bagwell
criminal
contempt
fine
million
imposed
union
unquestionably
serious
contempt
sanction
triggers
right
jury
trial
federal
statute
particular
see
used
obtain
substantial
judgments
organizational
defendants
see
amended
judgment
lg
display
nd
cal
pp
million
fine
conviction
single
count
violating
sherman
antitrust
act
judgment
siemens
aktiengesellschaft
dc
pp
million
fine
two
violations
foreign
corrupt
practices
act
sentencing
commission
annual
report
ch
noting
fine
billion
imposed
pharmaceutical
corporation
violations
food
drug
laws
defendant
individual
large
fine
may
engender
significant
infringement
personal
freedom
blanton
quoting
frank
see
also
requiring
consider
burden
fine
impose
upon
defendant
determining
whether
impose
fine
amount
government
thus
asks
wrong
question
comparing
severity
criminal
fines
punishments
far
apprendi
concerned
relevant
question
significance
fine
perspective
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
guarantee
fine
substantial
enough
trigger
right
apprendi
applies
full
said
cunningham
asking
whether
defendant
basic
right
preserved
though
facts
essential
punishment
reserved
determination
judge
inquiry
apprendi
rule
designed
exclude
case
exemplary
rcra
subjects
southern
union
maximum
fine
day
violation
government
deny
light
seriousness
punishment
company
properly
accorded
jury
trial
government
concedes
district
made
factual
findings
increased
potential
actual
fine
imposed
brief
exactly
apprendi
guards
judicial
factfinding
enlarges
maximum
punishment
defendant
faces
beyond
jury
verdict
defendant
admissions
allow
concluding
rule
apprendi
apply
criminal
fines
appeals
relied
decision
ice
ice
addressed
question
whether
defendant
convicted
multiple
offenses
apprendi
forbids
judges
determine
facts
authorize
imposition
consecutive
sentences
holding
apprendi
ice
emphasized
juries
historically
played
role
deciding
whether
sentences
run
consecutively
concurrently
see
appeals
reasoned
juries
similarly
uninvolved
setting
criminal
fines
appeals
correct
examine
record
scope
constitutional
jury
right
must
informed
historical
role
jury
common
law
ice
see
also
blakely
apprendi
view
record
supports
applying
apprendi
criminal
fines
sure
judges
founding
era
possessed
great
deal
discretion
determining
whether
impose
fine
amount
lillquist
see
also
preyer
often
fine
range
apparently
without
limit
except
insofar
within
expectation
part
paid
ibid
offenses
maximum
fine
capped
statute
see
robbery
larceny
burglary
offenses
punishable
massachusetts
bay
colony
fines
act
ch
stat
consul
gives
false
certificate
shall
forfeit
pay
fine
exceeding
ten
thousand
dollars
discretion
stith
cabranes
fear
judging
sentencing
guidelines
federal
courts
describing
federal
practice
exercise
sentencing
discretion
fully
consistent
apprendi
permits
courts
impose
judgment
within
range
prescribed
statute
emphasis
original
fortiori
apprendi
violation
maximum
prescribed
indeed
surveying
historical
record
formed
basis
holding
apprendi
considered
english
practice
respect
fines
true
many
colonial
offenses
made
sentencing
largely
dependent
upon
judicial
discretion
see
see
also
jones
blackstone
commentaries
laws
england
hereinafter
blackstone
even
dissent
acknowledges
post
opinion
breyer
authority
suggesting
english
juries
required
find
facts
determined
authorized
pecuniary
punishment
see
starkie
treatise
criminal
pleading
cases
offence
defined
measure
punishment
depends
upon
property
specific
value
value
must
proved
precisely
laid
indictment
variance
fatal
see
also
case
usury
judgment
depends
upon
quantum
taken
usurious
contract
must
averred
according
fact
variance
evidence
fatal
penalty
apportioned
value
emphasis
original
hawkins
treatise
pleas
crown
ch
pp
ed
doubting
whether
set
forth
value
goods
indictment
trespass
purpose
aggravate
fine
event
salient
question
role
jury
played
prosecutions
offenses
peg
amount
fine
determination
specified
facts
often
value
damaged
stolen
property
see
apprendi
thomas
concurring
review
state
federal
decisions
discloses
predominant
practice
facts
alleged
indictment
proved
jury
see
commonwealth
smith
mass
declining
award
judgment
treble
damages
stolen
items
larceny
prosecution
indictment
alleged
value
items
clark
people
arson
indictment
must
allege
value
destroyed
building
statute
imposed
fine
equal
value
property
burned
state
garner
port
malicious
mischief
prosecution
punishment
fine
exceeding
four
fold
value
property
injured
destroyed
ritchey
state
blackf
ind
arson
prosecution
addition
imprisonment
penitentiary
guilty
person
liable
fine
exceeding
double
value
property
destroyed
hope
commonwealth
mass
value
property
alleged
stolen
must
set
forth
indictment
part
ur
statutes
prescribe
punishment
larceny
reference
value
property
stolen
state
goodrich
may
also
suggested
case
simple
larceny
respondent
may
sentenced
pay
owner
goods
stolen
treble
value
thereof
additional
reason
requiring
value
stolen
items
stated
indictment
woodruff
defendant
entitled
constitutional
right
trial
jury
ascertain
exact
sum
fine
may
imposed
rule
juries
must
determine
facts
set
fine
maximum
amount
application
two
longstanding
tenets
criminal
jurisprudence
apprendi
based
first
every
accusation
defendant
afterwards
confirmed
unanimous
suffrage
twelve
equals
neighbours
blakely
quoting
blackstone
second
accusation
lacks
particular
fact
law
makes
essential
punishment
accusation
within
requirements
common
law
accusation
reason
quoting
bishop
criminal
procedure
ed
indeed
bishop
leading
treatise
criminal
procedure
specifically
identified
cases
involving
fines
evidence
proposition
indictment
must
order
inform
punishment
inflict
contain
averment
every
particular
thing
enters
punishment
discussing
clark
garner
principle
bishop
explained
pervades
entire
system
adjudged
law
criminal
procedure
made
apparent
understandings
single
case
cases
criminal
procedure
see
also
thomas
concurring
explaining
bishop
grounded
principle
practice
provisions
federal
state
constitutions
guaranteeing
notice
accusation
criminal
cases
indictment
grand
jury
serious
crimes
trial
jury
counterevidence
juries
historically
determine
facts
relevant
criminal
fines
government
points
two
decisions
one
murphy
pet
considered
whether
interested
witness
competent
testify
larceny
prosecution
brought
provision
crimes
act
murphy
relevance
case
crimes
act
authorized
fine
four
times
value
stolen
property
remarked
fine
amount
purely
discretion
statement
best
read
permitting
select
fine
within
maximum
authorized
facts
practice
noted
accords
apprendi
reading
consistent
fact
indictment
murphy
alleged
value
stolen
items
see
practice
contemporary
courts
addressing
statute
see
holland
cas
cc
sdny
trial
instructs
jury
assess
value
property
taken
order
determine
maximum
fine
pye
cas
cc
dc
value
stolen
items
alleged
indictment
government
dissent
place
greater
reliance
tyler
cranch
like
murphy
decision
involved
constitutional
question
rather
construed
federal
embargo
statute
imposed
fine
four
times
value
property
intended
exported
indictment
identified
property
issue
jury
guilty
verdict
instead
worth
two
hundred
eighty
dollars
tyler
cranch
question
whether
discrepancy
rendered
verdict
sufficiently
certain
value
property
charged
indictment
ibid
held
discrepancy
immaterial
ground
law
valuation
jury
necessary
enable
circuit
impose
proper
fine
ibid
reasoning
somewhat
opaque
appears
rest
text
embargo
statute
directed
defendant
shall
upon
conviction
fined
sum
ibid
event
nothing
decision
purports
construe
sixth
amendment
insofar
tyler
reflects
prevailing
practice
bears
noting
indictment
identified
value
property
issue
see
tr
tyler
cranch
reprinted
appellate
case
files
national
archives
microfilm
publications
roll
indictment
nineteen
barrels
pearlashes
value
six
hundred
dollars
whatever
precise
meaning
decision
outweigh
ample
historical
evidence
showing
juries
routinely
found
facts
set
maximum
amounts
fines
iii
government
remaining
arguments
echoed
dissent
see
post
unpersuasive
government
first
submits
comes
fines
judicially
found
facts
typically
involve
quantifying
harm
caused
defendant
offense
example
long
violation
last
much
money
defendant
gain
victim
lose
opposed
separate
set
acts
punishment
brief
latter
determination
government
contends
implicates
apprendi
concerns
argument
two
defects
first
rests
assumption
apprendi
progeny
uniformly
rejected
determining
maximum
punishment
offense
constitutionally
significant
difference
fact
element
offense
one
sentencing
factor
see
ring
second
doubt
coherence
distinction
case
proves
point
fact
ultimately
determine
maximum
fine
southern
union
faces
number
days
company
violated
statute
finding
fairly
characterized
merely
quantifying
harm
southern
union
caused
rather
determination
given
day
government
proved
southern
union
committed
acts
constituting
offense
government
next
contends
applying
apprendi
fines
prevent
federal
government
enacting
statutes
like
calibrate
fines
defendant
culpability
thus
providing
punishment
reducing
unwarranted
sentencing
disparity
government
presents
false
choice
true
prior
apprendi
cases
remains
legislatures
free
enact
statutes
constrain
judges
discretion
sentencing
apprendi
requires
provisions
administered
conformance
sixth
amendment
last
government
argues
requiring
juries
determine
facts
related
fines
cause
confusion
expert
testimony
might
needed
guide
inquiry
prejudice
defendant
might
deny
violating
statute
simultaneously
arguing
violation
minimal
impractical
least
relevant
facts
unknown
unknowable
trial
completed
arguments
rehearse
made
dissents
prior
apprendi
cases
see
booker
breyer
dissenting
part
blakely
dissenting
breyer
dissenting
apprendi
must
rejected
even
predictions
rule
government
espouses
unconstitutional
end
matter
blakely
particular
reason
doubt
strength
policy
concerns
apprendi
decade
old
reliance
interests
underlie
many
government
arguments
point
attenuated
view
applying
apprendi
rule
criminal
fines
mark
unexpected
extension
doctrine
circuits
addressed
issue
already
embrace
position
see
pfaff
lagrou
distribution
yang
fed
appx
government
prior
ice
see
brief
opposition
light
reasons
given
opinion
dramatic
departure
precedent
hold
criminal
fines
exempt
apprendi
hold
rule
apprendi
applies
imposition
criminal
fines
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
breyer
dissenting
southern
union
company
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
june
justice
breyer
justice
kennedy
justice
alito
join
dissenting
criminal
fine
issue
believe
sixth
amendment
permits
sentencing
judge
determine
sentencing
facts
facts
elements
crime
relevant
amount
fine
judge
impose
framed
bill
rights
understood
finding
particular
fact
kind
ordinarily
matter
judge
necessarily
within
domain
jury
oregon
ice
quoting
harris
plurality
opinion
contrary
conclusion
believe
ahistorical
lead
increased
problems
unfairness
administration
criminal
justice
system
although
dissent
depend
upon
dissents
apprendi
new
jersey
progeny
summarizing
earlier
dissents
help
reader
understand
one
see
dissenting
breyer
dissenting
see
also
booker
breyer
dissenting
part
citing
cases
blakely
washington
breyer
dissenting
apprendi
dissenters
argued
law
long
distinguished
facts
constitute
elements
offense
facts
relevant
sentencing
term
elements
offense
means
constituent
parts
crime
prosecution
must
prove
sustain
conviction
black
law
dictionary
ed
statute
creates
crime
question
typically
sets
forth
constituent
parts
jury
must
find
existence
element
beyond
reasonable
doubt
see
gaudin
winship
thus
bank
robbery
statute
might
prohibit
offender
taking
force
intimidation
presence
another
person
thing
value
belonging
custody
bank
case
jury
convict
finds
existence
four
factual
elements
beyond
reasonable
doubt
need
find
facts
beyond
reasonable
doubt
four
factual
elements
alone
constitute
crime
facts
may
relevant
length
kind
sentence
impose
upon
convicted
offender
sentencing
facts
typically
characterize
manner
offender
carried
crime
set
forth
relevant
features
characterizing
offender
example
respect
manner
offender
might
carried
particular
bank
robbery
without
gun
robber
kept
hidden
brandished
might
frightened
merely
warned
injured
seriously
less
seriously
tied
simply
pushed
guard
teller
customer
night
noon
effort
obtain
money
crimes
purposes
company
many
robbers
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
ussg
respect
characteristics
offender
current
bank
robbery
conviction
might
offender
first
fourth
criminal
conviction
traditionally
sentencing
facts
help
sentencing
judge
determine
within
say
broad
statutory
range
say
years
imprisonment
particular
bank
robber
punishment
lie
apprendi
dissenters
concluded
constitution
require
jury
find
existence
facts
beyond
reasonable
doubt
rather
law
rules
statutes
constitution
due
process
clause
typically
offer
defendant
factfinding
protection
see
fed
rule
crim
proc
federal
presentence
report
prepared
probation
office
sets
forth
facts
defendant
may
contest
sentencing
proceeding
constitutional
inquiry
dispute
apprendi
line
cases
arose
congress
many
codified
sentencing
facts
sentencing
reform
movement
congress
example
concluded
many
different
judges
imposing
many
different
sentences
upon
many
similar
offenders
committed
similar
crimes
similar
ways
subsequently
enacted
sentencing
reform
act
creating
federal
sentencing
commission
produce
greater
uniformity
sentencing
promulgation
mandatory
uniform
guidelines
structuring
judges
ordinary
cases
typically
use
sentencing
facts
determine
sentences
ed
supp
iv
see
also
majority
agreed
statute
set
higher
maximum
sentence
commission
might
structure
judge
found
sentencing
facts
relevant
sentence
imposed
otherwise
applicable
maximum
least
resulting
guidelines
mandatory
see
booker
majority
held
sentencing
fact
increased
otherwise
applicable
maximum
penalty
fact
found
jury
apprendi
said
dissenters
thought
sixth
amendment
require
jury
find
sentencing
facts
asked
dissenters
congress
state
desire
greater
sentencing
uniformity
achieved
statutes
seeking
uniform
treatment
similar
offenders
committing
similar
offenses
similar
ways
suddenly
produce
new
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
requirements
requirements
work
greater
sentencing
fairness
treat
sentencing
facts
specified
statute
rule
elements
offense
lead
congress
simply
set
high
maximum
ranges
crime
thereby
avoiding
di
jury
trial
requirement
alternatively
congress
might
enact
statutes
specifically
tied
particular
punishments
crime
limiting
removing
judicial
discretion
example
mandatory
minimum
statutes
system
threaten
disproportionality
insisting
similar
punishments
applied
different
kinds
offense
behavior
offenders
apprendi
jury
trial
requirements
might
also
prove
unworkable
consider
difficulty
juries
find
different
facts
bank
robbery
example
set
forth
moreover
defendant
arguing
gun
alternatively
argue
event
fire
gun
finally
dissenters
took
different
view
sixth
amendment
history
believed
common
law
time
constitution
ratified
judges
juries
often
found
sentencing
facts
facts
relevant
determination
offender
punishment
see
booker
supra
breyer
dissenting
part
apprendi
dissenting
dissenters
lost
argument
apprendi
held
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
dissenters
views
help
explain
continue
believe
extend
apprendi
rule
beyond
central
sphere
concern
ice
quoting
cunningham
california
kennedy
dissenting
view
set
forth
ice
base
dissent
primarily
upon
ice
ii
case
involves
sentencing
facts
elements
crime
criminal
statute
issue
constitutes
one
part
resource
conservation
recovery
act
rcra
among
others
things
authorizes
environmental
protection
agency
create
list
hazardous
wastes
criminal
statute
says
person
knowingly
treats
stores
disposes
hazardous
waste
identified
listed
rcra
without
permit
shall
upon
conviction
subject
fine
day
violation
imprisonment
exceed
five
years
one
denies
statute
creates
crime
four
elements
knowing
treatment
storage
disposal
waste
hazardous
without
permit
knowing
waste
substantial
potential
causing
harm
others
environment
app
see
brief
petitioner
number
day
violation
however
additional
element
crime
statute
says
number
days
becomes
relevant
upon
conviction
crime
previously
defined
moreover
number
days
relevant
application
one
two
kinds
punishment
statute
mentions
fine
imprisonment
one
easily
read
statute
creating
two
separate
crimes
identical
punishment
finally
congress
include
sometimes
done
statutory
words
day
violation
shall
constitute
separate
offense
see
also
rather
many
similar
statutes
statute
sets
forth
crime
kinds
punishments
fine
imprisonment
separately
specifying
facts
determine
maximum
punishment
one
kind
fines
particular
case
indictment
set
forth
violation
period
days
september
october
app
jury
guilty
verdict
specify
number
days
defendant
committed
offense
conviction
sentencing
hearing
judge
found
among
things
clear
essentially
irrefutable
evidence
trial
supported
conclusion
set
forth
presentence
report
namely
maximum
fine
available
amounted
per
day
days
million
app
pet
cert
judge
imposed
fine
million
along
million
community
service
obligation
app
iii
apprendi
says
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
number
days
beyond
one
defendant
violated
criminal
statute
fact
nonetheless
like
majority
believe
apprendi
rule
automatically
control
outcome
case
case
concerns
fine
apprendi
term
imprisonment
made
clear
oregon
ice
apprendi
encompass
every
kind
sentencing
decision
increases
statutory
maximum
ice
considered
apprendi
application
sentencing
decision
whether
two
prison
sentences
conviction
two
separate
crimes
illegal
drug
possession
illegal
gun
possession
run
concurrently
consecutively
oregon
statute
required
concurrent
sentence
unless
sentencing
judge
found
certain
facts
facts
make
large
difference
term
imprisonment
presence
mean
sentence
illegal
drug
possession
sentence
illegal
gun
possession
amount
years
imprisonment
rather
indeed
ice
judge
factfinding
increased
sentence
years
see
thus
presence
fact
increas
penalty
beyond
otherwise
prescribed
statutory
maximum
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
nonetheless
held
sixth
amendment
permitted
judge
require
jury
make
factual
determination
consequently
concluded
apprendi
encompass
every
kind
sentencing
decision
increases
statutory
maximum
wrote
animating
principle
apprendi
rule
preservation
jury
historic
role
bulwark
state
accused
trial
alleged
offense
refused
extend
apprendi
rule
new
category
facts
two
basic
reasons
first
considered
historical
question
namely
whether
finding
particular
fact
understood
within
domain
jury
framed
bill
rights
quoting
harris
read
historical
record
showing
england
founding
nation
early
american
jury
played
role
decision
impose
sentences
consecutively
concurrently
omitted
rather
decision
rested
exclusively
judge
second
recognizing
administration
discrete
criminal
justice
system
among
basic
sovereign
prerogatives
considered
need
respect
state
sovereignty
ibid
expressed
concern
lest
application
apprendi
kind
decision
inhibit
state
legislative
efforts
establish
fairer
sentencing
system
helping
bring
uniform
sentencing
ice
concluded
either
apprendi
sixth
amendment
traditions
compel
straitjacketing
respect
ibid
case
presents
another
new
category
sentencing
decisions
namely
decisions
amount
fine
thus
majority
recognizes
must
begin
historical
question
ante
judge
jury
found
facts
determine
amount
criminal
fine
england
founding
nation
early
american
ice
supra
omitted
unlike
majority
believe
answer
question
instances
judge
made
determination
iv
apprendi
relied
heavily
upon
fact
england
founding
nation
prescribed
punishment
serious
crimes
felonies
typically
fixed
indeed
fixed
death
see
baker
introduction
english
legal
history
ed
beattie
crime
courts
england
pp
hereinafter
beattie
langbein
english
criminal
trial
eve
french
revolution
trial
jury
england
france
germany
pp
schioppa
ed
facts
related
application
punishment
typically
elements
crime
jury
judge
determined
existence
facts
see
blackstone
commentaries
laws
england
hereinafter
blackstone
see
also
baker
supra
practice
jury
judge
ameliorate
capital
punishment
application
doctrines
pious
perjury
benefit
clergy
reprieves
king
grant
royal
pardon
beattie
punishment
lesser
crimes
however
included
fines
common
law
judge
jury
determined
amount
fine
sentencing
facts
relevant
setting
amount
see
baker
supra
beattie
pertinent
sentencing
facts
typically
concerned
manner
offender
committed
crime
characteristics
offender
see
thus
blackstone
wrote
statute
law
therefore
often
ascertained
quantity
fines
common
law
ever
directing
offense
punished
fine
general
without
specifying
certain
sum
blackstone
emphasis
added
quantum
particular
pecuniary
fines
neither
ascertained
invariable
law
value
money
changes
thousand
causes
events
ruin
one
man
fortune
may
matter
indifference
another
moreover
quantum
pecuniary
fines
must
frequently
vary
aggravations
otherwise
offense
manner
crime
committed
quality
conditions
parties
offender
characteristics
innumerable
circumstances
ibid
similarly
statesman
baron
auckland
pointed
england
law
attached
fixed
financial
penalty
specific
crime
principles
penal
law
ed
law
example
imposed
penalty
cows
perjury
cows
rape
maid
ibid
system
baron
auckland
added
ignored
variations
example
differing
value
fixed
fine
say
cow
time
among
individuals
also
ignored
manner
offense
committed
characteristics
offender
reasons
english
law
ordinarily
left
quantum
fine
discretion
judges
emphasis
deleted
enormity
tendency
crime
malice
wilfulness
intention
inconsiderateness
suddenness
act
age
faculties
fortune
offender
form
chain
complex
questions
resolved
evidence
separate
charge
human
foresight
provide
arises
necessary
appeal
breast
judge
emphasis
added
generally
applicable
limitations
judge
imposing
fine
contained
english
bill
rights
magna
carta
ch
eng
stat
large
forbidding
excessive
fines
magna
carta
hen
iii
eng
stat
large
fine
deprive
offender
means
livelihood
see
auckland
supra
interpreting
magna
carta
blackstone
sure
jury
judge
determine
facts
made
elements
crime
even
though
elements
might
relevant
whether
fine
apply
amount
fine
imposed
well
common
law
example
defined
larceny
theft
goods
intrinsic
value
divided
offense
grand
larceny
theft
goods
valued
shilling
petit
larceny
theft
goods
worth
less
shilling
blackstone
langbein
supra
see
also
beattie
whether
benefit
clergy
available
depended
value
stolen
consequently
jury
determine
value
goods
question
jury
might
manipulate
sentence
valuing
goods
shilling
thereby
spare
defendant
capital
sanction
lillquist
puzzling
return
jury
sentencing
misgivings
apprendi
rev
otherwise
jury
influence
penalties
like
fines
defendant
might
face
criminal
cases
amount
punishment
left
solely
hands
justices
ibid
determine
certainty
extent
law
placed
relevant
limitations
upon
judges
authority
determine
sentencing
facts
found
english
treatise
criminal
pleading
says
unlike
cases
constitute
offence
value
must
certain
amount
cases
offence
defined
measure
punishment
depends
upon
quantity
excess
variance
amount
averred
fatal
starkie
treatise
criminal
pleading
emphasis
deleted
adds
case
usury
judgment
depends
upon
quantum
taken
usurious
contract
must
averred
according
fact
variance
evidence
fatal
penalty
apportioned
value
treatise
says
questionable
whether
necessary
set
forth
value
goods
indictment
trespass
purpose
aggravate
fine
hawkins
treatise
pleas
crown
ch
pp
ed
emphasis
added
one
might
read
statements
supporting
majority
might
indicate
statute
sets
forth
facts
determine
pecuniary
penalty
jury
judge
determine
facts
whether
correct
reading
unclear
one
thing
prosecutions
economic
crimes
usually
brought
injured
parties
fine
cases
went
whole
part
compensate
party
damages
see
beattie
example
immediately
following
sentence
quoted
hawkins
wrote
questionable
whether
necessary
set
forth
value
goods
indictment
larceny
purpose
sh
crime
amounts
grand
larceny
ascertain
goods
thereby
better
ntitle
prosecutor
tution
hawkins
supra
emphasis
added
omitted
likewise
blackstone
dated
english
usury
law
back
statute
provided
penalty
offending
lender
shall
make
ne
king
pleasure
forfeit
treble
value
money
borrowed
half
king
half
sue
hen
viii
ch
stat
realm
emphasis
added
see
blackstone
see
also
ord
essay
law
usury
ed
forfeitures
recovered
information
qui
tam
discretionary
fines
recovered
criminal
indictment
thus
statutes
issue
american
courts
later
call
statutes
part
civil
part
criminal
see
also
beattie
parliament
consequently
special
reason
requiring
jury
determinations
amount
pecuniary
penalty
parliament
authority
depart
common
law
insist
juries
determine
sentencing
facts
without
establishing
generally
applicable
principle
relevant
question
often
purposes
parliament
blackstone
wrote
statutes
fixing
fines
amounts
derogation
common
law
uncommon
blackstone
finally
one
argues
adopt
rule
actually
suggested
treatises
rule
sentencing
done
according
value
found
jury
instead
discrepancy
value
alleged
value
found
jury
might
render
entire
case
fatal
see
starkie
supra
thus
place
great
weight
upon
statutes
parties
refer
briefs
event
historical
sources
taken
together
make
clear
predominant
practice
england
judge
jury
find
sentencing
facts
related
imposition
fine
indeed
apprendi
conceded
point
distinguished
punishments
greater
crimes
fixed
punishments
punishments
lesser
crimes
included
fines
wrote
judges
commonly
imposed
discretionary
fines
upon
misdemeanants
ibid
emphasis
added
insofar
english
practice
helps
determine
framers
thought
scope
constitution
terms
sixth
amendment
right
trial
impartial
jury
practice
suggests
expected
right
include
determination
sentencing
facts
relevant
imposition
fine
practice
early
american
even
less
ambiguous
colonial
era
judges
normally
determine
amount
fine
within
unlimited
otherwise
broad
range
also
determining
related
sentencing
facts
say
manner
offender
committed
crime
offender
characteristics
legal
historians
tell
us
american
colonies
criminal
fine
overwhelmingly
common
punishments
instances
range
fine
apparently
without
limit
except
insofar
within
expectation
paid
judge
established
precise
amount
fine
amount
tailored
individually
particular
case
preyer
penal
measures
american
colonies
overview
legal
hist
olonial
judges
like
english
brethren
possessed
great
deal
discretion
set
amount
fine
depending
upon
nature
defendant
crime
lillquist
enactment
constitution
bill
rights
change
practice
early
american
statutes
specified
judge
discretion
set
amount
fine
saying
nothing
amount
crimes
act
ch
stat
person
bribes
judge
conviction
thereof
shall
fined
imprisoned
discretion
stat
person
violence
ambassador
public
minister
conviction
shall
imprisoned
exceeding
three
years
fined
discretion
others
set
maximum
limitation
act
mar
ch
stat
officer
inspection
convicted
oppression
extortion
shall
fined
exceeding
five
hundred
dollars
imprisoned
exceeding
six
months
discretion
respect
statutes
justice
iredell
wrote
common
law
practice
must
adhered
say
jury
find
whether
prisoner
guilty
must
assess
fine
mundell
cas
cc
still
statutes
england
specifically
keyed
amount
fine
specific
factual
finding
section
crimes
act
example
said
person
upon
property
high
seas
shall
take
carry
away
intent
steal
purloin
personal
goods
another
shall
conviction
fined
exceeding
fourfold
value
property
stolen
stat
crime
several
elements
taking
carrying
away
intent
steal
personal
goods
belonging
another
property
high
seas
jury
must
find
existence
facts
beyond
reasonable
doubt
establish
conviction
statute
also
says
fine
exceed
fourfold
value
property
stolen
thereby
requires
finding
sentencing
fact
namely
value
stolen
property
make
determination
judge
jury
unlike
england
case
law
directly
answering
question
tyler
cranch
considered
federal
embargo
statute
making
crime
put
certain
goods
board
ship
intent
export
outside
see
act
ch
stat
statute
also
provided
offender
goods
ship
shall
forfeited
offender
shall
upon
conviction
fined
sum
conviction
equal
four
times
value
specie
goods
wares
merchandise
ibid
statute
thereby
required
determination
sentencing
fact
namely
value
goods
finding
sentencing
fact
judge
jury
tyler
defendant
indicted
attempting
export
barrels
valued
ante
jury
convicted
defendant
said
found
defendant
guilty
tried
export
worth
two
hundred
eighty
dollars
cranch
emphasis
deleted
defendant
appealed
claiming
difference
jury
basis
conviction
crime
charged
indictment
difference
words
unlikely
mattered
simply
refined
grade
potassium
carbonate
see
barker
dickinson
hardie
origins
synthetic
alkali
industry
britain
economica
thus
defendant
focus
upon
difference
rather
claimed
jury
verdict
sufficiently
certain
value
property
charged
indictment
tyler
cranch
emphasis
added
differs
jury
found
guilty
crime
charged
however
found
jury
finding
valuation
relevant
upheld
conviction
opinion
law
valuation
jury
necessary
enable
circuit
impose
proper
fine
ibid
emphasis
added
say
explicitly
sixth
amendment
permitted
judge
find
relevant
sentencing
fact
see
ante
seems
unlikely
included
chief
justice
john
marshall
justice
joseph
story
others
familiar
common
law
constitution
interpreted
federal
statute
either
contemporary
legal
practice
constitution
suggested
required
different
interpretation
say
fully
consider
matter
justice
story
later
authoritatively
interpreted
tyler
sitting
circuit
justice
mann
cas
ccnh
considered
question
respect
embargo
statute
wrote
tyler
cranch
prosecution
clause
held
fine
quadruple
value
must
assessed
adjudged
jury
emphasis
added
see
also
cas
ccnh
story
noting
reached
result
unless
satisfied
fine
imposed
found
jury
thus
nothing
early
american
practice
suggests
framers
thought
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
right
encompassed
right
jury
determine
sentencing
facts
contrary
opinion
namely
tyler
holds
least
strongly
indicates
opposite
majority
reaches
different
conclusion
majority
pose
believe
relevant
historical
question
namely
whether
traditionally
england
founding
nation
early
american
see
ice
omitted
judges
juries
normally
determined
sentencing
facts
instead
asks
whether
jury
rather
judge
found
facts
subclass
cases
statute
peg
ged
amount
fine
determination
specified
facts
ante
concludes
predominant
practice
facts
alleged
indictment
proved
jury
ibid
putting
question
way
invites
circular
response
true
english
usury
cases
nothing
prohibits
legislature
requiring
jury
find
sentencing
fact
particular
subset
cases
obviously
state
jury
indeed
find
facts
thus
say
decide
make
juries
find
facts
set
fine
say
simple
larceny
jury
practice
say
century
include
jury
finding
sentencing
facts
circumstance
tells
us
specific
statutes
legislatures
required
tells
us
little
anything
practices
tells
us
nothing
traditional
practice
england
america
discovery
say
state
legislatures
required
juries
rather
judges
generally
set
fines
tell
us
scope
sixth
amendment
constitutional
right
trial
jury
matter
important
majority
rests
conclusion
almost
exclusively
upon
reports
jury
trials
handful
namely
alabama
illinois
indiana
massachusetts
new
hampshire
treatise
bases
statements
upon
cases
ante
scholars
tell
us
fact
including
alabama
illinois
indiana
ratification
sixth
amendment
enacted
statutes
required
juries
judges
determine
defendant
punishment
including
length
prison
term
also
amount
fine
see
iontcheva
jury
sentencing
democratic
practice
rev
king
origins
felony
jury
sentencing
rev
courts
considered
practice
however
believe
constitutional
right
jury
trial
compelled
alabama
example
explained
state
system
allowed
jury
determine
fine
imprisonment
derogation
created
innovation
upon
rules
common
law
far
transfers
powers
jury
hawkins
state
stew
thus
state
garner
port
see
ante
malicious
mischief
statute
issue
said
offender
fined
sum
jury
trying
may
assess
exceeding
four
fold
value
property
injured
destroyed
emphasis
added
statute
words
transferred
sentencing
facts
jury
illustrative
practice
statute
said
shall
paid
party
injured
ibid
held
consequently
proper
allege
amount
property
value
indictment
state
constitution
required
thing
fine
thus
assesse
benefit
injured
party
case
therefore
quasi
civil
proceeding
reason
consonant
rules
pleading
principles
govern
analogous
cases
indictment
contain
averment
value
property
ibid
ord
law
usury
usury
proceeding
illinois
law
similar
illinois
became
state
see
iontcheva
supra
citing
act
laws
illinois
subsequently
wrote
even
though
common
law
juries
never
invested
power
determining
character
extent
punishment
governed
entirely
provisions
enactments
code
criminal
jurisprudence
blevings
people
scam
clark
people
scam
see
ante
made
clear
arson
statute
issue
ha
changed
common
law
fine
equal
value
property
burne
imposed
part
punishment
hence
indictment
charged
value
property
destroyed
otherwise
properly
inquired
jury
indiana
another
state
iontcheva
supra
king
supra
indiana
case
law
decided
indiana
changed
system
indicates
judge
decide
certain
facts
required
set
applicable
maximum
fine
morris
state
blackf
indiana
became
state
courts
held
surprisingly
indiana
law
jury
must
determine
sentencing
facts
see
ritchey
state
blackf
ante
massachusetts
presents
special
circumstance
two
massachusetts
cases
majority
cites
ante
larceny
cases
value
traditionally
element
crime
larceny
larceny
theft
goods
intrinsic
value
value
distinguished
grand
larceny
petit
larceny
thus
juries
traditionally
determine
least
facts
value
property
stolen
see
blackstone
massachusetts
abolished
distinction
grand
petit
larceny
courts
decided
two
cases
majority
cites
see
commonwealth
smith
mass
decisions
nonetheless
rest
significant
part
upon
jury
traditional
larceny
factfinding
role
hope
commonwealth
metcalf
example
massachusetts
judicial
wrote
well
settled
practice
familiar
us
stating
indictment
value
article
alleged
stolen
reason
requiring
allegation
finding
value
may
originally
distinction
might
appear
offences
grand
petit
larceny
statutes
prescribe
punishment
larceny
reference
value
property
stolen
reason
well
conformity
long
established
practice
opinion
value
property
alleged
stolen
must
set
forth
indictment
long
established
practice
refers
larceny
case
practice
practice
criminal
cases
new
hampshire
case
majority
refers
state
goodrich
ante
also
larceny
case
relied
established
larceny
case
practice
explained
indictment
state
value
articles
stolen
may
appear
whether
offence
grand
petit
larceny
believe
settled
practice
held
jurisdictions
case
value
alleged
offence
charged
may
regarded
simple
larceny
conviction
accordingly
think
best
adhere
well
established
doctrine
cases
may
also
suggested
case
simple
larceny
respondent
may
sentenced
pay
owner
goods
stolen
treble
value
thereof
additional
reason
requiring
character
offence
stated
wrote
nothing
suggest
holding
rested
generally
applicable
constitutional
grounds
new
hampshire
federal
circuit
earlier
justice
story
indicated
federal
constitution
impose
requirement
see
mann
leaves
majority
puzzling
federal
district
case
kansas
woodruff
ante
circumstances
case
highly
unusual
district
reasoning
fine
set
seems
rested
combination
statutory
construction
constitutional
principle
see
woodruff
cc
woodruff
still
concede
case
majority
lone
swallow
make
majority
summer
taken
together
cases
upon
majority
rests
holding
show
anything
practice
vast
majority
concede
practice
contrary
tell
us
little
meaning
sixth
amendment
even
understand
cases
tell
us
constitution
meaning
say
common
practice
leaving
sentencing
fact
determinations
judge
apparently
approved
latter
practice
constitutional
mcmillan
pennsylvania
cases
seem
closely
related
present
topic
upshot
english
common
law
american
law
typically
provided
judges
broad
discretion
assess
fines
judge
jury
normally
determine
sentencing
facts
respect
ordinary
sentencing
practice
related
fines
unlike
sentencing
practice
respect
felonies
latter
case
apprendi
view
punishment
normally
fixed
judge
sentencing
role
consequently
minimal
former
case
namely
fines
judge
role
normally
minimal
opposite
reasons
believe
allowing
judge
determine
sentencing
facts
related
imposition
fine
invade
historic
province
jury
historical
test
set
forth
ice
satisfied
ice
also
took
account
practical
extent
extending
apprendi
rule
beyond
sphere
diminish
role
devising
solutions
difficult
legal
problems
absent
impelling
reason
particular
feared
insisting
juries
determine
relevant
sentencing
facts
concerning
concurrent
opposed
consecutive
punishment
unjustifiably
interfere
state
legislative
efforts
rein
discretion
judges
possessed
common
law
impose
consecutive
sentences
inhibit
indeed
straightjacke
seeking
make
concurrent
sentences
rule
consecutive
sentences
exception
ibid
said
unclear
many
state
initiatives
fall
apprendi
extended
expansion
difficult
administer
believed
considerations
argued
strongly
expansion
kinds
considerations
similarly
argue
expansion
apprendi
rule
today
decision
applies
thereafter
well
federal
government
recognized
serious
problem
respect
sentencing
corporations
fines
imposed
punishment
upon
corporate
offenders
nonuniform
treating
identical
offenders
differently
often
set
low
judges
frequently
fine
corporations
amounts
failed
approximate
harm
corporation
caused
gain
obtained
illegal
activity
often
statutory
maximums
low
often
fines
imposed
tended
substantially
lower
maximums
see
gruner
towards
organizational
jurisprudence
transforming
corporate
criminal
law
federal
sentencing
reform
rev
kadish
observations
use
criminal
sanctions
enforcing
economic
regulations
chi
rev
nagel
swenson
federal
sentencing
guidelines
corporations
development
theoretical
underpinnings
thoughts
future
consequently
authors
model
penal
code
adopted
model
provision
stating
respect
offenses
involving
financial
gain
impose
alternative
higher
fine
equal
double
pecuniary
gain
derived
offense
offender
model
penal
code
new
york
soon
thereafter
adopted
provision
penal
law
ann
west
followed
new
york
example
similar
provisions
permitting
judges
set
fines
equal
twice
gain
offender
twice
loss
victim
thereby
helping
diminish
disparity
helping
potential
victims
increasing
deterrence
stat
ann
west
stat
many
statutes
say
particular
shall
make
finding
gain
loss
separate
hearing
necessary
penal
law
ann
west
stat
ann
west
federal
government
followed
suit
instances
rcra
environmental
harm
likely
varies
length
violation
period
congress
advanced
uniformity
deterrence
goals
tying
fine
length
time
violation
took
place
instances
new
general
provision
applying
offenses
including
crimes
corporate
fraud
antitrust
violations
environmental
pollution
provision
says
alternative
fine
based
gain
person
derives
pecuniary
gain
offense
offense
results
pecuniary
loss
person
defendant
defendant
may
fined
greater
twice
gross
gain
twice
gross
loss
unless
imposition
fine
subsection
unduly
complicate
prolong
sentencing
process
apply
apprendi
rule
fines
set
forth
statutes
less
ice
weaken
destroy
federal
government
efforts
rein
discretion
judges
possessed
common
law
ice
fines
congress
enacting
statutes
expected
judges
juries
determine
sentencing
facts
often
involve
highly
complex
determinations
say
major
fraud
issue
full
extent
loss
gain
may
unknown
time
indictment
time
prior
conclusion
trial
antitrust
environmental
pollution
case
jury
may
particular
difficulty
assessing
different
estimates
resulting
losses
consequence
majority
holding
insisting
juries
make
determinations
likely
diminish
fairness
criminal
trial
process
defendant
find
easy
show
jury
trial
committed
environmental
crime
event
committed
crime
days
moreover
majority
holding
sometimes
permit
prosecutors
introduce
newly
relevant
evidence
otherwise
kept
jury
ground
cumulative
unduly
prejudicial
victims
losses
relevant
prosecutor
may
able
produce
witness
witness
testifying
amount
life
savings
lost
fraud
defendant
case
example
thought
introduction
evidence
discovery
mercury
remediation
evacuation
nearby
apartment
complex
unduly
prejudicial
brief
citing
app
defendant
motion
limine
exclude
evidence
even
evidence
might
admitted
showing
amount
harm
caused
number
days
upon
defendant
unlawful
activity
took
place
administrative
problems
may
prove
serious
apprendi
prison
terms
stake
part
corporate
criminal
cases
often
focus
upon
complex
frauds
criminal
price
fixing
extended
environmental
pollution
safety
violations
like
congress
sentencing
commission
recognized
much
federal
criminal
fine
statute
earlier
referred
specifically
creates
exception
assessing
total
loss
gain
unduly
complicate
prolong
sentencing
process
similarly
sentencing
guidelines
applicable
corporations
exclude
fine
provisions
environmental
crimes
along
crimes
involving
export
violations
safety
products
rico
violations
potential
difficulty
defining
computing
loss
nagel
swenson
supra
see
ussg
defendant
human
government
avoid
problems
proof
simply
abandoning
effort
obtain
fine
instead
perhaps
individual
defendant
dismay
prosecution
seek
longer
prison
term
criminal
defendant
corporation
however
possibility
exists
seems
likely
becomes
difficult
prove
sentencing
facts
jury
legislatures
change
statutes
may
choose
return
highly
discretionary
sentencing
related
risks
nonuniformity
others
may
link
conviction
fines
specified
amount
rather
like
system
three
cows
perjury
modern
mandatory
minimum
penalties
blackstone
pointed
systems
produce
sentences
proportionate
tend
treat
alike
offenders
committed
crime
different
ways
see
blackstone
majority
believes
years
experience
apprendi
attenuate
legal
claim
reliance
different
rule
constitutional
law
ante
perhaps
perhaps
experience
shows
apprendi
jury
trial
requirement
workable
another
less
optimistic
possibility
perhaps
experience
like
canary
tells
us
criminal
justice
system
longer
adversarial
system
noted
percent
federal
convictions
percent
state
convictions
result
guilty
pleas
missouri
frye
slip
added
today
bargaining
adjunct
criminal
justice
system
criminal
justice
system
ibid
quoting
scott
stuntz
plea
bargaining
contract
yale
system
complex
jury
trial
requirements
may
affect
strength
party
bargaining
position
rather
conduct
many
actual
trials
time
prosecutor
system
perhaps
armed
statutes
providing
mandatory
minimum
sentences
become
ultimate
adjudicator
plays
important
role
many
european
inquisitorial
systems
prosecutors
unlike
typically
trained
formally
like
neutral
adjudicators
advocates
cf
langbein
weinreb
continental
criminal
procedure
myth
reality
yale
see
ècole
nationale
de
la
magistrature
today
holding
unnecessarily
complicating
trial
process
may
prove
workable
nudges
system
slightly
direction
see
virtue
reasons
respect
dissent
footnotes
see
preyer
penal
measures
american
colonies
overview
legal
hist
hereinafter
preyer
see
also
lillquist
puzzling
return
jury
sentencing
misgivings
apprendi
rev
hereinafter
lillquist
industries
kelco
disposal
concurring
part
dissenting
part
fines
preferred
penal
sanction
england
century
imprisonment
contrast
although
provided
punishment
colonies
central
feature
criminal
punishment
later
time
preyer
see
also
lillquist
fine
imposed
individual
defendants
organizational
defendants
federal
system
see
sentencing
commission
annual
report
ch
pp
see
cal
health
safety
code
ann
west
supp
rev
stat
ann
mass
laws
ch
west
stat
ann
west
supp
see
fine
greater
twice
gross
gain
twice
gross
loss
stat
tex
parks
wild
code
ann
west
see
also
fine
embezzlement
officers
courts
twice
value
money
embezzled
fine
bribery
public
officials
three
times
value
bribe
ice
also
stated
dicta
applying
apprendi
sentencing
determinations
might
imperil
variety
sentencing
decisions
judges
commonly
make
including
imposition
statutorily
prescribed
fines
appeals
read
statement
mean
apprendi
apply
criminal
fines
think
statement
ambiguous
likely
refers
routine
practice
judges
imposing
fines
within
range
authorized
facts
practice
poses
problem
apprendi
penalty
exceed
jury
verdict
permits
see
event
statement
ice
unnecessary
judgment
binding
central
community
college
katz
dissent
believes
decisions
inapposite
arose
authorized
juries
rather
judges
sentence
see
post
fact
basis
decisions
rather
courts
required
value
alleged
proved
jury
extent
punishment
depend
upon
value
property
consumed
injured
ritchey
see
also
clark
bishop
explained
requirement
proof
originated
unique
jury
sentencing
longstanding
point
dissent
notably
respond
bishop
criminal
procedure
ed
see
infra
matter
larceny
cases
presen
special
circumstance
post
decisions
invoked
reasoning
cases
mentioned
see
hope
value
must
proved
among
things
ur
statutes
prescribe
punishment
larceny
reference
value
property
stolen
goodrich
bishop
made
point
explicit
value
must
alleged
wherever
element
considered
determining
punishment
immaterial
whether
particular
crime
larceny
crime
criminal
procedure
omitted
emphasis
added
end
day
evidence
dissent
musters
judges
found
facts
tyler
cranch
one
decision
restating
tyler
holding
see
post
address
tyler
see
infra
keep
reader
suspense
alkaline
salts
differing
causticity
long
time
amongst
valuable
articles
manufacture
commerce
parts
early
america
townsend
principles
observations
applied
manufacture
inspection
pot
pearl
ashes
see
also
board
trustees
leland
stanford
junior
univ
roche
molecular
systems
slip
vein
dissent
speculates
today
decision
may
nudg
criminal
justice
system
favor
plea
bargains
expense
jury
trials
post
groups
representing
interests
defendants
dissent
rule
purportedly
favors
tell
us
opposite
true
see
brief
chamber
commerce
america
et
al
amici
curiae
xempting
criminal
fines
apprendi
makes
innocent
defendants
likely
plead
guilty