Apprendi v. New Jersey

Holding that “[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt”

Crawford v. Washington

Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause bars "admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination"

Blakely v. Washington

Holding that “[w]hen a judge inflicts punishment that the jury's verdict alone does not allow, the jury has not found all the facts ‘which the law makes essential to the punishment,’ and the judge exceeds his proper authority”

Jackson v. Virginia

Holding that courts conducting review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction should view the "evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution"

Estelle v. McGuire

Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions

Batson v. Kentucky

Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes

Davis v. Washington

Holding that statements made "in the course of police interrogation" are testimonial when made under "circumstances objectively indicat[ing] ... that the primary purpose of the interrogation [was] to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution"

Cunningham v. California

Holding that the "jury-trial guarantee proscribes a sentencing scheme that allows a judge to impose a sentence above the statutory maximum based on a fact, other than a prior conviction, not found by the jury or admitted by the defendant"

Ring v. Arizona

Holding that “[i]f a State makes an increase in a defendant's authorized punishment contingent on the finding of a fact, that fact—no matter how the State labels it—must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt”

Chapman v. California

Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

Section Amendment VI - Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions

Granting the accused the right to be tried "by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed."

Section 3 - Vacancy in office of Chief Justice; disability