Romaine Dukes v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “Apprendi presents a new rule of constitutional law that is not of ‘watershed’ magnitude and, consequently, petitioners may not raise Apprendi claims on collateral review”
• holding that “Apprendi presents a new rule of constitutional law that is not of ‘watershed’ magnitude and, consequently, petitioners may not raise Apprendi claims on collateral review”
• holding that “Apprendi presents a new rule of constitutional law that is not of ‘watershed’ magnitude and, consequently, petitioners may not raise Apprendi claims on collateral review”
• holding that “Apprendi presents a new rule of constitutional law that is not of ‘watershed’ magnitude and, consequently, petitioners may not raise Apprendi claims on collateral review”
• “[W]hen drug quantity has not been alleged in the indictment and found beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury, Apprendi precludes imposition of a sentence in excess of the maximum prescribed by 21 U.S.C. § 841(b) 1
• “One panel may not overrule another.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).