United States v. Sean Lamar Sanders, A/K/A Sean Lamont Sanders

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[t]he first exception clearly does not apply here because Apprendi did not place drug conspiracies beyond the scope of the state’s authority to proscribe”
• holding that \a rule which merely shifts the fact-finding duties from an impartial judge to a jury clearly does not fall within the scope of the second Teague exception\
• holding that “a rule which merely shifts the fact-finding duties from an impartial judge to a jury clearly does not fall within the scope of the second Teague exception”
• holding that rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is not retroactively applicable to cases on col- lateral review
• holding that the plain text of § 3582(b) “clearly states” that a modification of a sentence does not affect the date on which a defendant’s judgment of conviction becomes final
• holding that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), \constitutes a procedural rule because it dictates what fact- finding procedure must be employed\ (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).