Alleyne v. United States
2013 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Alleyne v. United States?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case that decided that, in line with Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000), all facts that increase a mandatory minimum sentence for a criminal offense must be submitted to and found true by a jury, not merely determined to be true at a judge's discretion. The majority opinion was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.[1]
This article needs additional citations for verification. (July 2013) |
Quick Facts Alleyne v. United States, Argued January 14, 2013 Decided June 17, 2013 ...
Alleyne v. United States | |
---|---|
Argued January 14, 2013 Decided June 17, 2013 | |
Full case name | Allen Ryan Alleyne, Petitioner v. United States |
Docket no. | 11-9335 |
Citations | 570 U.S. 99 (more) 133 S. Ct. 2151; 186 L. Ed. 2d 314 |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Case history | |
Prior | United States v. Alleyne, 457 F. App'x 348 (4th Cir. 2011) |
Holding | |
Because mandatory minimum sentences increase the penalty for a crime, any fact that increases the mandatory minimum is an "element" of the crime that must be submitted to the jury. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Thomas, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan (Parts I, III–B, III–C, and IV); Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan (Parts II and III–A) |
Concurrence | Sotomayor, joined by Ginsburg, Kagan |
Concurrence | Breyer (in part) |
Dissent | Roberts, joined by Scalia, Kennedy |
Dissent | Alito |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. VI | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
Harris v. United States (2002) |
Close