![]() ![]() ![]() The majority found that this was the critical distinction separating other sentencing factors from the enhancement in this case, especially since the enhancement was completely separate from the elements of the underlying crime. The emergence of sentencing factors as a concept emerged in the 1980s to describe facts that limited the range of the potential sentence but did not increase the maximum sentence. They relied on historical analysis that suggested that there was little or no difference between an element of a crime and a sentencing factor, since traditionally judges had little discretion in determining sentences. The Justices viewed the hate crime enhancement as an additional penalty, almost as though it were a separate crime with a separate sentence. ![]() The majority examined a range of precedents in finding that any enhancement that raises the penalty of a crime above the statutory maximum sentence must be considered by a jury and proved by a reasonable doubt rather than evaluated by a judge according to a lower standard of proof. State courts found that the enhancement was appropriate because it was defined as a sentencing factor rather than an element of the crime. ![]() (Testimony was presented by Apprendi and defense psychologists to challenge that interpretation and argue that he committed the crimes because he was drunk, but the judge believed the policeman's story that the crimes were committed because of anti-African-American sentiment.) Apprendi received a 12-year sentence once the judge added two years to the maximum sentence because of the hate crimes enhancement. Using a preponderance of the evidence standard, the trial judge found that Apprendi's actions were the result of racial bias and thus that the hate crime enhancement was appropriate. While the prosecution preserved its right to seek such an enhancement, Apprendi preserved his right to appeal the application of the enhancement on constitutional grounds. These terms would be doubled if the prosecution succeeded in imposing an enhanced sentence because a hate crime was involved. He pleaded guilty to a group of charges, each of which would have resulted in a sentence of five to 10 years. fired shots into the home of an African-American family in his neighborhood, admittedly because of their race and because he did not want to have African-Americans in his neighborhood. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |