Register

In the case of the U.S. Supreme Court cases ruled that requiring sentencing judges to consider facts that have not been proven to a jury violates the Constitution. A) Apprendi v…

In the case of the U.S. Supreme Court cases ruled that requiring sentencing judges to consider facts that have not been proven to a jury violates the Constitution. A) Apprendi v…
214k views
0 votes
In the case of the U.S. Supreme Court cases ruled that requiring sentencing

judges to consider facts that have not been proven to a jury violates the
Constitution.
A) Apprendi v. New Jersey
B) Melendez v. U.S.
C) Blakely v. Washington
OD) U.S. v. Booker

User Rlarroque
by
7.9k points

1 Answer

1 vote

Answer:

D.) United States v. Booker

Step-by-step explanation:

User TJ Mazeika
by
8.2k points
← Prev Question Next Question →

Related questions

Ask a Question
Welcome to QAmmunity.org, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of our community.

9.4m questions

12.2m answers

Categories

Other Questions

Jacinda makes collections on real estate loans. Last year, she made approximately 20 collections and collected $38,000. Must Jacinda be licensed?
When an excessive amount of alcohol is consumed causing a person to stop or breath slowly, vomit in their sleep. or appear pale or bluish the person is possibly suffering from • Binge drinking Intoxication
1. MIDTERM TEST Midterm 13. Which of the following gives the Constitution the final word in regards to this country's legal code?
Link Copied!