Click on red text to view a Supreme Court Collection on the Cornell Law School web site.
After viewing each case, hit the "Back" button to return to this page.

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) – Apprendi was charged with second-degree possession of a firearm for an unlawful purpose. Although Apprendi fired shots into the home of an African American family because he did not want them in his neighborhood, the charges did not reference New Jersey’s hate crime statute, which expressly permits upward departure if the crime was committed “with a purpose to intimidate . . . because of race, color, gender, handicap, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.” During sentencing, the presiding judge found that the crime was racially motivated and sentenced Apprendi to 12 years, two years beyond the statutory maximum for the crime with which he was charged. The majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court stated that any fact that influences upward departure from the presumptive statutory maximum other than a prior conviction must be argued in front of a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) –The jury at Ring’s trial was deadlocked on the charge of premeditated murder, but delivered a guilty verdict on the charge of felony murder occurring during the course of an armed robbery. Unless further evidence could be brought to light via a separate sentencing hearing conducted by a judge, Ring could not be sentenced to death (the statutory maximum for first degree murder). Ring’s appeal argued that the upward departure from the maximum sentence violated his Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ring.

Schriro v. Summerlin, 526 U.S. 542 (2004) – Summerlin was convicted of first-degree murder under Arizona’s capital sentencing scheme, which allowed a judge to determine the presence of aggravating circumstances that make the defendant eligible for the death penalty. Decided the same day as Blakely, Summerlin questioned whether the Supreme Court announced a new, substantive rule of law with Ring v. Arizona that must be applied retroactively.

Blakely v. Washington – Blakely pleaded down to second-degree kidnapping with a firearm, as well as second-degree assault, for kidnapping his estranged wife. The elements of the crime to which Blakely admitted in the plea merited a maximum sentence of 53 months. The judge in the Blakely case imposed an exceptional sentence upward of 90 months, which exceeds the high end of the standard range, but is within the statutory maximum. The question, then, presented to the U.S. Supreme Court was whether a fact other than prior conviction necessary for an upward departure from a statutory standard sentencing range must be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt in front of a jury, according to the procedures mandated by Apprendi.

U.S. v. Booker - Convicted of possession with intent to distribute 50 grams of cocaine base, Booker was facing a sentence of 10 years to life in prison. By a preponderance of the evidence, the presiding judge found during the sentencing phase that Booker had distributed an additional 566 grams and had obstructed justice. The additional drug and obstruction charges ratcheted Booker’s sentence into the range of 30 years to life. With Blakely as precedent, Booker challenged the ruling, claiming that the sentencing guidelines as they had been applied were unconstitutional. The Supreme Court later upheld the reversal of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and made the sentencing guidelines advisory.

U.S. v. Fanfan – Fanfan was found guilty of conspiracy to distribute more than 500 grams of cocaine hydrochloride. During the sentencing phase, the prosecution submitted hearsay testimony and argued for a sentence based on the possession and sale of cocaine base. The defense objected, arguing that if the state wanted to sentence Fanfan based on a charge for crack cocaine, they should have indicted him for such. The court ruled—and the Supreme Court later agreed—that in light of the Blakely ruling, he could not sentence Fanfan for cocaine base.