We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Admitting Guilt by Professing Innocence: When Sentence Enhancements Based on Alford Pleas Are Unconstitutional.
- Authors
Gooch, Anne D.
- Abstract
The article examines the sentence enhancements entered under Alford pleas, a plea bargaining process in which defendants to plead guilty for a crime without admitting factual guilt. It looks at the case against Charles Apprendi Jr. whose conviction was imposed with a two-year hate crime enhancement for firing into an African-American home. It concludes that applying an enhancement in the Apprendi case which employed an Alford plea is illogical since the basis for hate crime was not admitted.
- Subjects
PLEA bargaining; APPRENDI v. New Jersey (Supreme Court case); APPRENDI, Charles; GUILTY pleas; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); HATE crime laws; CRIMINAL sentencing
- Publication
Vanderbilt Law Review, 2010, Vol 63, Issue 6, p1755
- ISSN
0042-2533
- Publication type
Article