From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Booker

U.S.
Aug 2, 2004
542 U.S. 956 (2004)

Summary

granting writ of certiorari to decide issue

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Johns

Opinion

No. 04-104.

August 2, 2004.


C.A. 7th Cir. Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to file a reply brief in excess of the page limits granted. Certiorari in No. 04-104 granted. Certiorari before judgment in No. 04-105 granted. Cases consolidated, and a total of two hours allotted for oral argument. Brief of petitioner is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 3 p.m., Wednesday, September 1, 2004. Briefs of respondents are to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 3 p.m., Tuesday, September 21, 2004. A reply brief, if any, is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 3 p.m., Monday, September 27, 2004. Oral argument set for Monday, October 4, 2004. Reported below: No. 04-104, 375 F. 3d 508.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Booker

U.S.
Aug 2, 2004
542 U.S. 956 (2004)

granting writ of certiorari to decide issue

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Johns

In Booker, the Supreme Court concluded that the federal sentencing guidelines are subject to the jury trial requirements of the Sixth Amendment.

Summary of this case from Matthews v. U.S.

In Booker, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment is violated by the mandatory imposition of an enhanced sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines based on the sentencing judge's determination of a fact (other than a prior conviction) that was not found by the jury or admitted by the defendant.

Summary of this case from Brown v. U.S.
Case details for

U.S. v. Booker

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES v. BOOKER

Court:U.S.

Date published: Aug 2, 2004

Citations

542 U.S. 956 (2004)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Swanson

After the parties submitted their initial briefs to this court, two events altered the landscape of this…

United States v. Pree

For the reasons set forth in the following opinion, we affirm the judgment of conviction but vacate the…