et
argued
february
decided
may
respondents
burgess
carried
firearm
attempted
robbery
count
three
indictment
charged
using
firearm
furtherance
crime
violence
carries
mandatory
minimum
prison
term
count
four
alleged
use
machinegun
pistol
authorities
believed
operated
fully
automatic
firearm
furtherance
crime
carries
mandatory
minimum
term
ii
government
moved
dismiss
fourth
count
basis
establish
count
beyond
reasonable
doubt
maintained
ii
machinegun
provision
sentencing
enhancement
determined
district
upon
conviction
count
three
dismissed
count
four
rejected
government
position
respondents
pleaded
guilty
remaining
counts
sentenced
term
burgess
term
convictions
affirming
district
ii
ruling
first
circuit
looked
primarily
castillo
held
machinegun
provision
earlier
version
constituted
element
offense
sentencing
factor
found
castillo
close
binding
absent
clearer
dramatic
changes
made
congress
amendment
clearer
legislative
history
held
fact
firearm
machinegun
element
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
sentencing
factor
proved
judge
sentencing
pp
generally
fact
increase
prescribed
range
penalties
criminal
defendant
exposed
element
crime
apprendi
new
jersey
charged
indictment
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
hamling
rather
proved
judge
sentencing
preponderance
evidence
mcmillan
pennsylvania
subject
constitutional
constraint
congress
determines
whether
factor
element
sentencing
factor
congress
explicit
courts
look
statute
provisions
framework
guidance
analysis
current
machinegun
provision
begins
castillo
found
bare
language
prior
version
neutral
ruled
four
factors
language
structure
tradition
risk
unfairness
severity
sentence
favored
treating
machinegun
provision
element
offense
fifth
factor
legislative
history
favor
either
side
ibid
pp
relevant
amendment
divided
lengthy
principal
sentence
separate
subparagraphs
thus
regard
first
castillo
factor
observation
congress
placed
element
carries
firearm
word
single
sentence
broken
dashes
separated
subsections
longer
holds
true
however
amendment
affect
second
fifth
castillo
factors
except
legislative
history
remains
relatively
silent
continues
favor
treating
machinegun
provision
element
amendment
effect
language
structure
factor
requires
closer
examination
pp
given
determination
castillo
machinegun
provision
prior
version
element
substantive
change
statute
inferred
bsent
clear
indication
congress
change
policy
grogan
garner
nothing
amendment
indicates
change
three
principal
differences
previous
current
first
substantive
change
shifts
mandatory
sentences
mandatory
minimum
sentences
second
also
substantive
made
direct
response
holding
bailey
uses
carries
preamendment
version
connotes
mere
possession
adds
possesses
uses
carries
language
principal
paragraph
provides
sentencing
enhancements
brandishing
discharging
firearm
ii
iii
state
sentencing
factors
harris
neither
substantive
changes
suggests
congress
meant
transform
machinegun
provision
element
sentencing
factor
third
difference
machinegun
provision
relocation
principal
paragraph
unmistakably
lists
offense
elements
separate
subsection
structural
stylistic
change
provides
clear
indication
congress
meant
alter
treatment
machineguns
offense
element
logical
explanation
restructuring
intended
break
lengthy
principal
paragraph
exceeded
words
readable
statute
step
current
legislative
drafting
guidelines
recognized
placing
factors
separate
subsections
one
way
congress
might
signal
treating
sentencing
factors
rather
elements
castillo
supra
rejected
view
structural
consideration
predominates
even
factors
point
direction
harris
supra
current
structure
favorable
treating
machinegun
provision
sentencing
factor
true
castillo
particularly
machinegun
provision
positioned
sentencing
factors
provided
ii
iii
ii
structural
point
overcome
substantial
weight
castillo
factors
principle
congress
enact
significant
change
without
clear
indication
purpose
pp
affirmed
kennedy
delivered
opinion
roberts
stevens
scalia
ginsburg
breyer
alito
sotomayor
joined
stevens
filed
concurring
opinion
thomas
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
petitioner
martin
arthur
burgess
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
may
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
must
interpret
title
code
provision
prohibits
use
carrying
firearm
relation
crime
violence
drug
trafficking
crime
possession
firearm
furtherance
crimes
violation
statute
carries
mandatory
minimum
term
five
years
imprisonment
firearm
machinegun
statute
requires
mandatory
minimum
sentence
ii
whether
firearm
used
carried
possessed
concede
element
offense
issue
whether
fact
firearm
machinegun
element
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
sentencing
factor
proved
judge
sentencing
earlier
case
determined
analogous
machinegun
provision
previous
version
constituted
element
offense
proved
jury
castillo
castillo
decision
however
addressed
statute
existed
congressional
amendments
made
case
castillo
brandishing
provision
version
held
provide
sentencing
factor
element
offense
harris
light
amendments
harris
decision
question
interpret
machinegun
provision
considered
instant
case
june
respondents
martin
arthur
burgess
attempted
rob
armored
car
making
scheduled
delivery
cash
bank
along
third
collaborator
respondents
hid
minivan
waited
armored
car
make
stop
men
carried
firearm
containing
nearly
million
attended
two
guards
armored
car
arrived
guard
began
unload
boxes
coins
three
men
came
van
one
brandished
weapon
ordered
guards
get
ground
one
guard
ran
nearby
restaurant
respondents
abandoned
robbery
fled
without
taking
money
shots
fired
one
injured
authorities
apprehended
respondents
recovered
three
firearms
used
attempted
robbery
firearms
semiautomatic
pistol
semiautomatic
rifle
cobray
pistol
cobray
pistol
manufactured
external
appearance
semiautomatic
firearm
according
federal
bureau
investigation
though
operated
fully
automatic
weapon
apparently
due
alteration
original
firing
mechanism
respondents
dispute
whether
cobray
fact
operate
fully
automatic
weapon
respondents
indicted
multiple
counts
relevant
counts
three
four
charged
offenses
count
three
charged
respondents
using
firearm
furtherance
crime
violence
carries
statutory
minimum
five
years
imprisonment
count
four
charged
respondents
specific
terms
alleging
use
machinegun
cobray
furtherance
crime
violence
proscribed
ii
latter
provision
mandates
minimum
sentence
years
imprisonment
government
moved
dismiss
count
four
basis
unable
establish
count
beyond
reasonable
doubt
issues
present
case
require
consider
contention
defendant
uses
carries
possesses
firearm
must
aware
weapon
characteristics
opinion
expresses
views
point
government
maintained
machinegun
provision
ii
sentencing
factor
respondents
convicted
carrying
firearm
count
three
determine
sentencing
particular
firearm
machinegun
thus
activating
mandatory
minimum
district
dismissed
count
four
government
requested
rejected
government
position
machinegun
provision
sentencing
enhancement
determined
sentencing
conviction
count
three
ruled
machinegun
provision
element
crime
thus
invoke
minimum
sentence
government
required
charge
indictment
prove
jury
cobray
machinegun
point
district
foreclosed
possibility
respondents
facing
minimum
respondents
pleaded
guilty
remaining
counts
including
count
three
district
sentenced
term
conviction
run
consecutively
sentence
two
counts
sentenced
burgess
term
conviction
also
run
consecutively
sentence
charges
government
appealed
district
ruling
machinegun
provision
constitutes
element
offense
instead
sentencing
factor
appeals
first
circuit
affirmed
looked
primarily
castillo
held
machinegun
provision
earlier
version
constituted
element
offense
sentencing
factor
noted
statute
consideration
castillo
revised
congress
break
ing
single
sentence
subparagraphs
acknowledged
earlier
repealed
version
statute
slightly
favorable
respondents
current
version
markedly
found
evidence
breaking
sentence
present
subdivisions
recasting
language
anything
current
trend
probably
ease
reading
convert
lengthy
sentences
criminal
statutes
subsections
fashion
tax
code
concluded
absent
clearer
dramatic
change
language
legislative
history
expressing
specific
intent
assign
judge
jury
functions
think
castillo
close
binding
reconsideration
issue
left
ibid
see
also
rodriguez
de
quijas
express
precedent
direct
application
case
yet
appears
rest
reasons
rejected
line
decisions
appeals
follow
case
directly
controls
leaving
prerogative
overruling
decisions
granted
certiorari
ii
elements
crime
must
charged
indictment
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
hamling
jones
sentencing
factors
hand
proved
judge
sentencing
preponderance
evidence
see
mcmillan
pennsylvania
though
one
exception
established
see
unconstitutional
legislature
remove
jury
assessment
facts
increase
prescribed
range
penalties
criminal
defendant
exposed
apprendi
new
jersey
quoting
jones
supra
stevens
concurring
words
sentencing
factors
may
guide
confine
judge
discretion
sentencing
offender
within
range
prescribed
statute
apprendi
supra
sentencing
factors
increase
maximum
sentence
defendant
might
otherwise
receive
based
purely
facts
found
jury
subject
constitutional
constraint
whether
given
fact
element
crime
sentencing
factor
question
congress
congress
explicit
often
case
seldom
directly
addresses
distinction
sentencing
factors
elements
courts
look
provisions
framework
statute
determine
whether
fact
element
sentencing
factor
supra
examining
whether
machinegun
provision
element
sentencing
factor
analysis
must
begin
previous
examination
question
castillo
castillo
considered
prior
version
provided
whoever
relation
crime
violence
drug
trafficking
crime
uses
carries
firearm
shall
addition
punishment
provided
crime
violence
drug
trafficking
crime
sentenced
imprisonment
five
years
firearm
rifle
shotgun
imprisonment
ten
years
firearm
machinegun
destructive
device
equipped
firearm
silencer
firearm
muffler
imprisonment
thirty
years
supp
determining
whether
machinegun
provision
version
constituted
element
sentencing
factor
castillo
observed
bare
statutory
language
neutral
examined
five
factors
directed
determining
congressional
intent
language
structure
tradition
risk
unfairness
severity
sentence
legislative
history
unanimously
concluded
machinegun
provision
provided
element
offense
noting
first
four
factors
favored
treating
legislative
history
significantly
favor
either
side
ibid
iii
section
amended
current
form
amendment
enacted
considered
castillo
supra
version
statute
issue
instant
case
concerns
current
version
statute
provides
except
extent
greater
minimum
sentence
otherwise
provided
subsection
provision
law
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
firearm
possessed
person
convicted
violation
subsection
rifle
shotgun
semiautomatic
assault
weapon
person
shall
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
ii
machinegun
destructive
device
equipped
firearm
silencer
firearm
muffler
person
shall
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
amendment
make
substantive
changes
statute
discussed
purposes
present
case
apparent
effect
amendment
divide
lengthy
principal
sentence
separate
subparagraphs
observation
considering
first
castillo
factor
congress
placed
element
carries
firearm
word
single
sentence
broken
dashes
separated
subsections
longer
holds
true
aside
new
structure
however
amendment
nothing
affect
second
fifth
castillo
factors
factors
except
legislative
history
assuming
relevance
remains
relatively
silent
continues
favor
conclusion
machinegun
provision
element
offense
legal
tradition
past
congressional
practice
second
castillo
factor
factor
consulted
statute
text
unclear
whether
certain
facts
constitute
elements
sentencing
factors
sentencing
factors
traditionally
involve
characteristics
offender
recidivism
cooperation
law
enforcement
acceptance
responsibility
characteristics
offense
traditionally
treated
elements
use
machinegun
lies
closest
heart
crime
issue
less
true
today
years
ago
castillo
unsurprisingly
firearm
type
treated
element
number
statutes
numerous
gun
crimes
make
substantive
distinctions
weapons
pistols
machineguns
ibid
see
government
counters
tradition
pattern
evolved
since
version
review
castillo
enacted
government
contends
federal
sentencing
guidelines
altered
tradition
treating
possession
firearm
sentencing
factor
brief
citing
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
raising
base
offense
level
offense
involved
firearm
argument
persuasive
sentencing
reform
act
stat
establishing
federal
sentencing
guidelines
enacted
four
years
version
review
castillo
see
abuse
act
stat
resulting
guidelines
effective
still
enactment
statute
issue
castillo
years
conclusion
castillo
firearm
type
traditionally
treated
offense
element
government
claim
benefit
shift
law
traditionally
treats
firearm
type
guidelines
supposed
shift
occurred
version
enacted
guidelines
explicitly
taken
account
analyzed
traditions
castillo
discussing
federal
sentencing
guidelines
determining
traditionally
qualifies
sentencing
factor
third
castillo
factor
potential
unfairness
unchanged
restructuring
explained
castillo
treating
machinegun
provision
sentencing
factor
might
unnecessarily
produce
conflict
judge
jury
jury
may
well
decide
several
weapons
defendant
used
concern
judge
may
know
weapon
jurors
determined
defendant
used
judge
later
decision
defendant
used
machinegun
rather
say
pistol
might
conflict
jury
belief
actively
used
pistol
ibid
concern
arises
current
version
jurors
might
determine
among
several
weapons
defendant
used
carried
possessed
furtherance
crime
government
response
permitting
judge
make
finding
streamlin
proceedings
without
interfering
accuracy
brief
unconvincing
address
particular
unfairness
concern
expressed
castillo
alleviated
restructuring
government
suggest
subjected
unfairness
machinegun
provision
continues
treated
element
fourth
castillo
factor
severity
sentence
accompanying
finding
defendant
carried
machinegun
also
unaffected
statute
restructuring
finding
defendant
carried
machinegun
contrast
less
dangerous
firearm
vaults
defendant
mandatory
minimum
sentence
years
castillo
supra
years
case
firearm
brandished
ii
akin
incremental
changes
minimum
one
expect
see
provisions
meant
identify
matters
sentencing
judge
consideration
harris
years
years
drastic
sixfold
increase
strongly
suggests
separate
substantive
crime
one
substantive
difference
old
new
versions
might
bear
fourth
factor
previous
version
provided
mandatory
sentences
years
using
carrying
firearm
years
firearm
machinegun
example
see
supp
current
statute
provides
mandatory
minimums
less
years
using
possessing
firearm
less
brandishing
less
firearm
machinegun
ii
ii
government
argues
difference
critical
sentence
conceivable
statute
even
without
finding
particular
weapon
machinegun
brief
distinction
theory
perhaps
practice
neither
government
party
amicus
identified
single
defendant
whose
conviction
possessing
brandishing
nonspecific
firearm
led
sentence
approaching
sentence
required
firearm
machinegun
respondents
advise
without
refutation
courts
impose
mandatory
minimum
years
imprisonment
brandishing
nonspecific
weapon
longest
sentence
come
litigants
attention
years
brief
respondent
citing
batts
fed
appx
per
curiam
see
also
harris
supra
thomas
dissenting
indeed
instant
case
burgess
received
statutory
minimum
sentence
received
months
machinegun
enhancement
table
government
seek
anything
approaching
terms
instead
requesting
terms
respondent
immense
danger
posed
machineguns
moral
depravity
choosing
weapon
substantial
increase
minimum
sentence
provided
statute
support
conclusion
prohibition
element
crime
sentencing
factor
likely
congress
intended
remove
indictment
jury
trial
protections
provided
extreme
sentencing
increase
see
jones
best
questionable
whether
specification
facts
sufficient
increase
penalty
range
let
alone
years
life
meant
carry
none
process
safeguards
elements
offense
bring
defendant
benefit
perhaps
congress
concerned
parsing
distinction
elements
sentencing
factors
matter
often
discussed
courts
discussing
proper
allocation
functions
judge
jury
instead
likely
focused
deterring
crime
creating
mandatory
minimum
sentences
severity
increase
case
counsels
favor
finding
prohibition
element
least
absent
clear
congressional
indication
contrary
fifth
factor
considered
castillo
legislative
history
found
little
help
insofar
history
may
relevant
however
significantly
help
government
amendment
legislative
record
discussed
parties
accurately
observe
silent
congressional
consideration
distinction
elements
sentencing
factors
brief
brief
respondent
silence
neutral
however
explained
tends
counsel
finding
congress
made
substantive
change
statutory
provision
four
five
factors
relied
upon
castillo
point
direction
years
ago
amendment
affects
remaining
factor
provision
language
structure
requires
closer
examination
castillo
interpreted
original
version
though
congress
point
already
amended
provision
applicable
principle
congress
enact
substantive
changes
sub
silentio
see
director
revenue
mo
cobank
acb
light
castillo
determination
machinegun
provision
previous
version
element
change
inferred
bsent
clear
indication
congress
change
policy
grogan
garner
see
also
rivers
roadway
express
hen
construes
statute
explaining
understanding
statute
meant
continuously
since
date
became
law
government
argues
amendment
restructuring
demonstrates
congressional
judgment
reclassify
machinegun
provision
sentencing
factor
rather
offense
element
better
understanding
government
acknowledged
submission
castillo
nothing
suggest
amendments
intended
change
rather
simply
reorganize
clarify
treatment
firearm
type
brief
closer
review
amendment
confirms
three
principal
differences
previous
current
versions
two
substantive
changes
third
regarding
stylistic
structure
statute
first
difference
discussed
supra
amendment
changed
mandatory
sentences
mandatory
minimum
sentences
person
convicted
primary
offense
using
carrying
firearm
crime
violence
sentenced
imprisonment
five
years
current
version
sentenced
term
imprisonment
less
years
second
difference
amended
version
includes
word
possesses
addition
uses
carries
principal
paragraph
adds
substantive
provisions
ii
iii
provide
mandatory
minimums
brandishing
years
discharging
years
firearm
provisions
new
substantive
additions
text
previous
version
provided
bare
mandatory
minimum
offender
use
carrie
firearm
without
concern
firearm
used
changes
direct
response
decision
bailey
held
word
use
version
must
connote
mere
possession
firearm
person
commits
drug
offense
bailey
went
observe
ad
congress
intended
possession
alone
trigger
liability
easily
provided
using
word
possess
frequently
done
statutory
provisions
ibid
three
years
later
congress
made
change
added
word
possesses
principal
paragraph
congress
additionally
provided
mandatory
sentences
minimum
depending
whether
firearm
used
sections
ii
iii
provide
sentencing
enhancements
brandishing
discharging
firearm
held
enhancements
sentencing
factors
found
judge
see
harris
see
also
dean
slip
referring
brandishing
discharge
provisions
sentencing
factors
amendment
colloquially
known
bailey
fix
act
cong
rec
remarks
dewine
see
also
dean
supra
stevens
dissenting
slip
aside
shifting
mandatory
sentences
mandatory
minimums
bailey
fix
congress
left
substance
statute
unchanged
neither
substantive
changes
suggests
congress
meant
transform
machinegun
provision
element
sentencing
factor
government
stresses
third
structural
difference
statute
pointing
machinegun
provision
resides
separate
subsection
whereas
resided
principal
paragraph
unmistakably
lists
offense
elements
structural
stylistic
change
though
provide
clear
indication
congress
meant
alter
treatment
machineguns
offense
element
see
grogan
logical
explanation
restructuring
broke
lengthy
principal
paragraph
exceeded
words
even
adding
bailey
fix
readable
statute
step
current
legislative
drafting
guidelines
advise
drafters
break
lengthy
statutory
provisions
separate
subsections
read
easily
see
house
legislative
counsel
manual
drafting
style
hlc
pp
senate
office
legislative
counsel
legislative
drafting
manual
pp
indicated
placing
factors
separate
subsections
one
way
congress
might
signal
treating
sentencing
factors
opposed
elements
castillo
harris
rejected
view
structural
consideration
predominates
even
factors
point
direction
ven
statute
look
suggesting
numbered
subsections
sentencing
provisions
ignore
compelling
evidence
contrary
quoting
jones
instance
jones
found
federal
carjacking
statute
set
forth
elements
multiple
offenses
despite
structure
similar
statute
issue
harris
careful
point
unlike
case
bar
castillo
factors
reinforce
interpretation
implied
statute
structure
examining
amended
version
structure
additional
consideration
supports
interpreting
machinegun
provision
offense
element
explained
brandishing
discharge
provisions
codified
ii
iii
state
sentencing
factors
see
harris
supra
dean
supra
slip
congress
intended
treat
firearm
type
sentencing
factor
likely
listed
firearm
types
clauses
iv
subparagraph
instead
clauses
ii
subparagraph
listing
firearm
type
subparagraph
congress
set
apart
sentencing
factors
ii
iii
consistent
preserving
firearm
type
element
separate
offense
sure
arguments
favor
treating
machinegun
provision
sentencing
factor
current
structure
favorable
interpretation
true
castillo
particularly
machinegun
provision
positioned
sentencing
factors
provided
ii
iii
see
harris
supra
recidivist
provisions
ii
typically
sentencing
factors
well
see
points
overcome
however
substantial
weight
castillo
factors
principle
congress
enact
significant
change
without
clear
indication
purpose
evident
congressional
purpose
amend
statute
counteract
bailey
make
statute
readable
otherwise
alter
substance
statute
analysis
holding
castillo
control
case
machinegun
provision
ii
element
offense
judgment
appeals
affirmed
ordered
petitioner
martin
arthur
burgess
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
may
justice
stevens
concurring
sentencing
factor
may
serve
two
different
functions
historical
matter
term
described
fact
trial
judge
might
rely
upon
choosing
specific
sentence
within
range
authorized
legislature
setting
judge
broad
discretion
determining
significance
factor
whether
established
reliable
evidence
part
national
effort
enact
tougher
new
type
sentencing
factor
emerged
since
term
used
describe
facts
found
judge
preponderance
evidence
effect
imposing
mandatory
limits
sentencing
judge
discretion
used
element
mandatory
sentencing
scheme
sentencing
factor
functional
equivalent
element
criminal
offense
circumstances
continue
believe
constitution
requires
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
factor
first
encountered
use
sentencing
factor
mandatory
minimum
context
mcmillan
pennsylvania
examined
constitutionality
pennsylvania
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
act
act
pennsylvania
statute
subjected
anyone
convicted
specified
felony
mandatory
minimum
sentence
trial
judge
found
preponderance
evidence
defendant
visibly
possessed
firearm
commission
offense
see
four
prosecutions
act
trial
judges
held
statute
unconstitutional
imposed
sentences
lower
mandatory
minimum
presumably
recognized
statute
treated
visible
possession
firearm
functional
equivalent
offense
element
appeal
pennsylvania
consolidated
four
cases
reasoned
visible
possession
firearm
mere
sentencing
factor
rather
element
specified
offenses
defined
legislature
protections
afforded
cases
like
winship
apply
bare
majority
mcmillan
endorsed
novel
use
sentencing
factor
concept
five
justices
concluded
prerequisite
mandatory
sentence
sentencing
factor
rather
element
offense
factor
alte
maximum
penalty
crime
merely
limit
sentencing
discretion
selecting
penalty
within
range
already
available
yet
although
pennsylvania
act
mandatory
sentence
visible
possession
firearm
commission
offense
exceed
statutory
maximum
otherwise
applied
crimes
conviction
positive
finding
sentencing
factor
mandated
imposition
sentence
exceeded
punishment
defendant
otherwise
received
see
stevens
dissenting
majority
opinion
mcmillan
fairly
described
pathmarking
unlike
one
predecessors
winship
pointed
wrong
direction
reasons
set
forth
opinions
joined
four
dissenting
justices
mcmillan
continue
believe
mcmillan
incorrectly
decided
see
marshall
dissenting
stevens
dissenting
ii
mcmillan
wrong
day
decided
reasoning
substantially
undermined
eviscerated
development
sixth
amendment
jurisprudence
recent
years
understand
unconstitutional
sixth
amendment
legislature
remove
jury
assessment
facts
increase
prescribed
range
penalties
criminal
defendant
exposed
apprendi
new
jersey
quoting
jones
stevens
concurring
harmonizing
apprendi
existing
sixth
amendment
jurisprudence
explained
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
emphasis
added
words
narrowed
holding
facts
effectively
raised
ceiling
offense
consider
whether
logic
holding
applied
also
facts
necessary
set
floor
particular
sentence
justice
thomas
eloquently
explained
dissent
harris
reasoning
decision
apprendi
applies
equal
force
context
mandatory
minimums
quite
simply
reason
distinguish
facts
trigger
punishment
excess
statutory
maximum
facts
trigger
mandatory
minimum
case
vividly
illustrates
point
quite
plain
world
difference
sentence
sentence
judge
imposed
defendants
case
sentence
mandated
machinegun
finding
mandatory
minimums
may
particularly
acute
practical
effect
type
statutory
scheme
contains
implied
statutory
maximum
life
see
ante
type
case
ceiling
floor
sentence
fall
furthermore
absent
positive
finding
one
enumerated
factors
quite
clear
judge
impose
sentence
great
sentences
commanded
provision
issue
case
indeed
appears
subject
mandatory
minimum
defendant
ever
sentenced
sentence
anywhere
near
years
offense
see
brief
respondent
apprendi
signaled
end
mcmillan
signaled
unconstitutionality
state
federal
determinate
sentencing
schemes
blakely
washington
booker
thanks
unpersuasive
attempt
distinguish
reluctant
apprendi
dissenter
mcmillan
survived
protest
four
members
see
harris
breyer
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
easily
distinguish
apprendi
case
terms
logic
reason
agree
plurality
opinion
insofar
finds
distinction
time
yet
accept
apprendi
rule
appears
however
reluctant
apprendi
dissenter
may
longer
therefore
full
agreement
justice
thomas
separate
writing
today
post
harris
dissent
mcmillan
harris
overruled
least
extent
authorize
judicial
factfinding
preponderance
evidence
standard
facts
expos
defendant
greater
punishment
otherwise
legally
prescribed
harris
thomas
dissenting
fact
functional
equivalent
element
offense
iii
view
simplest
correct
solution
case
us
recognize
fact
mandating
imposition
sentence
severe
judge
otherwise
discretion
impose
treated
element
offense
unanimity
decision
today
imply
mcmillan
safe
direct
challenge
foundation
petitioner
martin
arthur
burgess
writ
certiorari
appeals
first
circuit
may
justice
thomas
concurring
judgment
harris
held
ther
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
whether
statute
calls
element
sentencing
factor
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
quoting
apprendi
new
jersey
continue
believe
constitutional
requirement
applies
sentencing
facts
like
machinegun
enhancement
issue
ii
alte
defendant
statutorily
mandated
sentencing
range
increasing
mandatory
minimum
sentence
regardless
whether
alter
statutory
maximum
penalty
harris
thomas
dissenting
see
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
view
makes
difference
whether
sentencing
fact
vaults
defendant
mandatory
minimum
sentence
many
years
ante
ly
ibid
quoting
harris
supra
make
difference
whether
sentencing
fact
involve
characteristics
offender
haracteristics
offense
ante
direction
factors
test
may
tilt
one
question
decides
matter
sentencing
fact
either
raises
floor
raises
ceiling
range
punishments
defendant
exposed
definition
elemen
harris
supra
thomas
dissenting
quoting
apprendi
supra
without
finding
defendant
used
machinegun
penalty
range
conviction
five
years
life
imprisonment
finding
added
penalty
range
becomes
harsher
years
life
imprisonment
ii
thus
expos
ing
defendant
greater
punishment
otherwise
legally
prescribed
harris
thomas
dissenting
consequence
ultimately
beside
point
whether
matter
statutory
interpretation
machinegun
enhancement
sentencing
factor
constitutional
matter
establishes
harsher
range
punishments
must
treated
element
separate
aggravated
offense
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ibid
reaches
conclusion
based
analysis
test
see
ante
concur
judgment
footnotes
enacted
mandatory
sentence
enhancement
laws
wide
variety
provisions
lowenthal
mandatory
sentencing
laws
undermining
effectiveness
determinate
sentencing
reform
cal
rev
omitted
see
also
ost
current
mandatory
enhancement
laws
appear
schulhofer
rethinking
mandatory
minimums
wake
forest
rev
discussing
history
federal
mandatory
minimum
sentencing
regime
see
apprendi
new
jersey
mcmillan
first
time
coined
term
factor
refer
fact
found
jury
affect
sentence
imposed
judge
commonwealth
wright
winship
explicitly
held
due
process
clause
protects
accused
conviction
except
upon
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
every
fact
necessary
constitute
crime
charged
consistent
attempt
harris
distinguish
apprendi
justice
kennedy
fine
opinion
today
employs
acrobatics
distinguish
harris
present
case
harris
also
involved
though
different
subsection
reading
mandatory
minimum
brandishing
firearm
contained
sentencing
factor
easily
distinguished
nearly
identical
mandatory
minimum
possessing
machinegun
harris
said
thought
apprendi
cover
mandatory
minimums
accept
apprendi
well
point
guess
accept
apprendi
law
time
become
issue
whether
mandatory
minimums
treated
like
maximums
apprendi
purposes
reset
case
argument
tr
oral
arg
question
breyer