People v. Lathon

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that even though 730 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/5—5—3 (c) (8) “increases the defendant’s sentence, it does not change the classification of the offense with which defendant has been charged and convicted”
• noting that Apprendi recognized that prior convictions are an exception to the general rule that facts which increase a sentence beyond the statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt
• treating recidivism as an element of the charged offense could result in significant prejudice
• defendant’s sentencing as a recidivist was not subject to Apprendi rule generally requiring a jury determination of fact issues relating to sentencing
• general rule requiring a jury determination of fact issues for sentencing did not apply to recidivist provision under Apprendi
• general rule requiring a jury determination of fact issues for sentencing did not apply to recidivist provision under Apprendi

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).