Federal Sentencing: A Sketch of Apprendi v. New Jersey and Its Impact (CRS Report for Congress)
| Release Date |
March 20, 2001 |
| Report Number |
RS20850 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Charles Doyle, American Law Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
In Apprendi v. New Jersey , 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000), the Supreme Court called
into question
the sentencing role of federal judges. At the very least, the decision has required alterations in the
manner in which federal drug statutes and similar provisions are prosecuted, and it may herald the
demise of the federal sentencing guidelines. Apprendi holds that "under the due process
clause of the
Fifth Amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment, any fact (other
than prior conviction) that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an
indictment, submitted to a jury, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt," 120 S. Ct. at 2355.
The Court's sharp change of direction and the slim and fragile nature of the consensus among the
members of the majority make predictions perilous. It is therefore perhaps not surprising that the
various federal appellate courts have thus far construed Apprendi narrowly.
