Constitutional Law
Aug. 16, 2000
'Apprendi' Appraisal
By Erwin Chemerinsky. Simply put, the court held that it violates due process and the Sixth Amendment to convict a person of one crime but punish him or her for another.
Erwin Chemerinsky
Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law
Erwin's most recent book is "Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism." He is also the author of "Closing the Courthouse," (Yale University Press 2017).
In a U.S. Supreme Court term filled with blockbuster decisions, perhaps the single most important case was one that received very little publicity. In Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S.Ct. 2348 (June 26, 2000), the Supreme Court held that the Constitution requires that any fact that increases t...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In