United States v. Edward Coleman A/K/A John Long, Edward Coleman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Shepard did not affect the continuing validity of Almendarez-Torres
• “[A]s the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres remains good law ..., Coleman’s argument regarding the Government’s failure to prove his prior convictions to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt is unpersuasive.”
• “[A]s the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres remains good law ..., Coleman’s argument regarding the Government’s failure to prove his prior convictions to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt is unpersuasive.”
• “[P]rior convictions that increase the statutory maxi- mum for an offense are not elements of the offense and thus may be determined by the District Court by a preponderance of the evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).