530 U.S. 466 (2000) Cited 26,646 times 100 Legal Analyses
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”
408 U.S. 471 (1972) Cited 10,676 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that parolees "must have an opportunity to be heard and to show . . . that circumstances in mitigation suggest that the violation does not warrant revocation"
408 U.S. 104 (1972) Cited 4,712 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute's words, even when "marked by flexibility and reasonable breadth, rather than meticulous specificity," are clear based on "what the ordinance as a whole prohibits"
419 U.S. 544 (1975) Cited 861 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that Congress, which regulated the introduction of alcoholic beverages in "Indian country" could validly delegate to Indian tribes its authority to regulate that subject matter because Indian tribes themselves possessed independent authority over the subject matter
269 U.S. 385 (1926) Cited 2,761 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute violates due process for vagueness if “men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application”