en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almendarez-Torres_v._United_States

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), was a decision by the United States ... If it defined a separate crime, then the Government's failure to include it in the indictment meant that the conviction and sentence had to be set ...

www.oyez.org/cases/1997/96-6839

Oct 14, 1997 ... Does subsection (b)(2) of 8 USC section 1326(a), which forbids an alien who once was deported to return to the United States without special ...

www.loc.gov/item/usrep523224

Periodical U.S. Reports: Almendarez-Torres v. ... Library: - Supreme Court: - United States: - Government Documents: - Judicial review and appeals: - Appellate ...

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/523/224.html

Case opinion for US Supreme Court ALMENDAREZ-TORRES v. U.S.. ... Since it does not create a separate crime, the Government is not required to charge the ...

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/523/224

Almendarez-Torres v. ... Since it does not create a separate crime, the Government is not required to ... At most, In re Winship, 397 U. S. 358, 364; Mullaney v.

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1148335.html

Case opinion for US 2nd Circuit MELGAR DE TORRES v. RENO. ... *Anne Pilsbury, Central American Legal Assistance, Brooklyn, New York, for Petitioner.

www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-6839.ZS.html

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH ... Since it does not create a separate crime, the Government is not required to ...

lawaspect.com/case-almendarez-torres-v-united-states

LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ... We'll hear argument next in Number 96-6839, Hugo Roman Almendarez Torres v. ... notwithstanding subsection (a), which the Government itself concedes as a must, that ...

www.scotusblog.com/2011/01/re-list-watch-will-the-court-reconsider-almendarez-torres

Jan 27, 2011 ... In the landmark decision Apprendi v. ... United States (1998), over the dissent of Justices Scalia, Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg. ... for me, because I represented the government), the Court did not take the argument up.