Discover this podcast and so much more

Podcasts are free to enjoy without a subscription. We also offer ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more for just $11.99/month.

Erlinger v. United States (Sixth Amendment -- Jury Trial)

Erlinger v. United States (Sixth Amendment -- Jury Trial)

FromSupreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)


Erlinger v. United States (Sixth Amendment -- Jury Trial)

FromSupreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)

ratings:
Length:
11 minutes
Released:
Jun 23, 2024
Format:
Podcast episode

Description

Erlinger v. United States Paul Erlinger pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U. S. C. §922(g). At sentencing, the judge found Mr. Erlinger eligible for an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act, §924(e)(1), which increases the penalty for a 922(g) conviction from a maximum sentence of 10 years to a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years when the defendant has three or more qualifying convictions for offenses committed on different occasions. Subsequently, the Seventh Circuit held in unrelated decisions that two of the offenses on which the government relied for Mr. Erlinger’s sentence enhancement no longer qualified as ACCA predicate offenses. The District Court vacated Mr. Erlinger’s sentence and scheduled resentencing. At the resentencing hearing, prosecutors again pursued an ACCA sentence enhancement based on a new set of 26-year-old convictions for burglaries committed by Mr. Erlinger over the course of several days. Mr. Erlinger protested that the burglaries were part of a single criminal episode and did not occur on separate occasions, as required by ACCA. Held: The Fifth and Sixth Amendments require a unanimous jury to make the determination beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant’s past offenses were committed on separate occasions for ACCA purposes. Pp. 5–26.  Read by RJ Dieken.
Released:
Jun 23, 2024
Format:
Podcast episode

Titles in the series (100)

Decisions of the Supreme Court, summarized by the court itself.Readings of the Supreme Court slip opinion syllabi, With no personal commentary, you can make up your own mind about the decisions. See Wheaton and Donaldson v. Peters and Grigg, 33 U.S. 591 (1834) and United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337. Photo by: Davi Kelly