Citation network
James Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 18, 2007
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
James v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 05-9264 (2007) Syllabus October Term, 2006 James V. UnitedSearch
-
found in Taylor v. UnitedSearch
-
any intent to exclude attempts that otherwise meet the statutory criteria. See, e.g., Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. EchazabalSearch
-
argument that construing attempted burglary as a violent felony raises Sixth Amendment issues under Apprendi v. NewSearch
-
a dissenting opinion, in which Stevens and Ginsburg, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion. James v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 05-9264 (2007) Opinion of the Court James V. UnitedSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 05-9264 Alphonso James, Jr., Petitioner V. UnitedSearch
-
because it does not meet the definition of burglary under ACCA that this Court set forth in Taylor v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
that James would read into it. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. EchazabalSearch
-
see also United States v. DavisSearch
-
United States v. AdamsSearch
-
Shepard v. UnitedSearch
-
Jones v. StateSearch
-
s lower courts appear to have consistently applied this heightened standard. See, e.g. , Richardson v. StateSearch
-
Davis v. StateSearch
-
necessarily present a serious potential risk of injury before the offense can be deemed a violent felony. Cf. Gonzales v. Duenas-AlvarezSearch
-
for example, an attempted murder where the gun, unbeknownst to the shooter, had no bullets, see United States v. ThomasSearch
-
State v. HamiltonSearch
-
see also United States v. MatthewsSearch
-
s residual provision). v. FinallySearch
-
James argues that construing attempted burglary as a violent felony raises Sixth Amendment issues under Apprendi v. NewSearch
-
and are not at issue here. Footnote 2 The Jones court distinguished its earlier holding in Thomas v. StateSearch
-
act directed toward entering or remaining in a building. 608 So. 2d, at 799. Footnote 3 See United States v. LaneSearch
-
United States v. SolomonSearch
-
United States v. CustisSearch
-
United States v. ThomasSearch
-
United States v. AndrelloSearch
-
United States v. DavisSearch
-
United States v. BureauSearch
-
United States v. DemintSearch
-
United States v. CollinsSearch
-
Footnote 4 In United States v. StrahlSearch
-
United States v. PermenterSearch
-
In United States v. MartinezSearch
-
And in United States v. WeekleySearch
-
is not so indefinite as to prevent an ordinary person from understanding what conduct it prohibits. See Kolender v. LawsonSearch
-
prior convictions need not be treated as an element of the offense for Sixth Amendment purposes. Almendarez-Torres v. UnitedSearch
-
States , 523 U. S. 224 (1998). James v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 05-9264 (2007) Scalia, J., Dissenting James V. UnitedSearch
-
indeterminate line. Compare ante , at 10 (concluding that attempted burglary poses sufficient risk), with Leocal v. AshcroftSearch
-
that will provide notice of what is covered and prevent arbitrary or discriminatory sentencing. See Kolender v. LawsonSearch
-
States , 544 U. S. 13 , 17 (2005) (quoting Taylor v. UnitedSearch
-
Taylor v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial