This HTML5 document contains 130 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
n12https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
n16https://www.oyez.org/cases/2004/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n21http://www.ussc.gov/booker_report/
n15https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n22https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/375/508/559646/
n7https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/543/
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n11http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/files/
n20http://
n17http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/reprint/34/1/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n24https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/543/220/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
n27http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2004/2pet/7pet/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:United_States_v._Booker
rdf:type
wikidata:Q2334719 yago:Happening107283608 owl:Thing yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCasesOfTheRehnquistCourt yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:Abstraction100002137 dbo:LegalCase yago:Event100029378 dbo:UnitOfWork yago:Case107308889 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 dbo:Case
rdfs:label
United States v. Booker
rdfs:comment
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court decision on criminal sentencing. The Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to jury trial requires that other than a prior conviction, only facts admitted by a defendant or proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury may be used to calculate a sentence exceeding the prescribed statutory maximum sentence, whether the defendant has pleaded guilty or been convicted at trial. The maximum sentence that a judge may impose is based upon the facts admitted by the defendant or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
foaf:name
United States v. Freddie J. Booker; United States v. Ducan Fanfan
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:Cocaine_in_the_United_States dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Rehnquist_Court dbc:United_States_Sixth_Amendment_sentencing_case_law dbc:Drug_control_law_in_the_United_States dbc:2005_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines_case_law
dbo:wikiPageID
2029145
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1095904764
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Washington_(state) dbr:District_of_Maine dbr:Base_(chemistry) dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_543 dbr:Preponderance_of_the_evidence dbc:Cocaine_in_the_United_States dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:Plead_guilty dbr:United_States_v._Binion dbr:Stephen_Breyer dbr:Sentencing_guidelines dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:John_Paul_Stevens dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_First_Circuit dbr:Witte_v._United_States dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Seventh_Circuit dbr:Apprendi_v._New_Jersey dbr:U.S._LEXIS dbr:Ohio_State_University dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Rehnquist_Court dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:Beyond_a_reasonable_doubt dbr:Federal_Appendix dbr:Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Federal_appeals_court dbr:Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines dbr:Jury_trial dbr:Mitigating_factor dbc:United_States_Sixth_Amendment_sentencing_case_law dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Wisconsin dbr:Crack_cocaine dbr:United_States_v._Watts dbr:Appellate_review dbr:Federal_district_judge dbr:Antonin_Scalia dbc:Drug_control_law_in_the_United_States dbc:2005_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Stare_decisis dbr:United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines dbr:United_States_v._Dunnigan dbr:Blakely_v._Washington dbr:Mistretta_v._United_States dbr:Edwards_v._United_States dbr:Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbc:United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines_case_law dbr:F.3d dbr:Certiorari dbr:Certiorari_before_judgment
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n11:nycdl_amicus_brief.pdf n16:04-104 n17:124.pdf n7:220.html n20:sentencing.typepad.com n12:04-104.ZS.html n21:Booker_Report.pdf n22: n24: n27:2004-0104.pet.aa.pdf
owl:sameAs
yago-res:United_States_v._Booker n15:4way2 wikidata:Q7893229 freebase:m.06g8n6
dbp:subsequent
0001-01-24
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:USC dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Ussc dbt:SCOTUS_URL_Slip dbt:Sixth_Amendment dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Ordered_list dbt:Reflist
dbp:dissent
Breyer Scalia Stevens Thomas
dbp:docket
4
dbp:joindissent
Souter; Scalia Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy
dbp:joinmajority
Scalia, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Ginsburg
dbp:lawsapplied
U.S. Const. amend. VI; 18 U.S.C. ยงยง 3553, 3742
dbp:oyez
n16:04-104
dbp:parallelcitations
172800.0
dbp:prior
25920.0
dbp:uspage
220
dbp:usvol
543
dbp:arguedate
0001-10-04
dbp:argueyear
2004
dbp:case
United States v. Booker,
dbp:decidedate
0001-01-12
dbp:decideyear
2005
dbp:findlaw
n7:220.html
dbp:fullname
United States v. Freddie J. Booker; United States v. Ducan Fanfan
dbp:justia
n24:
dbp:litigants
United States v. Booker
dbp:majority
Stevens Breyer
dbp:otherSource
Supreme Court
dbo:abstract
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court decision on criminal sentencing. The Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to jury trial requires that other than a prior conviction, only facts admitted by a defendant or proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury may be used to calculate a sentence exceeding the prescribed statutory maximum sentence, whether the defendant has pleaded guilty or been convicted at trial. The maximum sentence that a judge may impose is based upon the facts admitted by the defendant or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. In its majority decision, the Court struck down the provision of the federal sentencing statute that required federal district judges to impose a sentence within the United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines range, along with the provision that deprived federal appeals courts of the power to review sentences imposed outside the range. The Court instructed federal district judges to impose a sentence with reference to a wider range of sentencing factors set forth in the federal sentencing statute, and it directed federal appeals courts to review criminal sentences for "reasonableness," which the Court left undefined. The ruling was the direct consequence of the Court's ruling six months earlier in Blakely v. Washington, in which the Court had imposed the same requirement on a guidelines sentencing scheme employed in Washington state. Blakely arose out of Apprendi v. New Jersey in which the Court held that except for a prior conviction, any fact that increases the defendant's punishment above the statutory maximum punishment must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
dbp:cornell
n12:04-104.ZS.html
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:United_States_v._Booker?oldid=1095904764&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
35529
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:United_States_v._Booker