v. Mayden, 413 U.S. 665, 668, 93 S.Ct. 2926, 37 L.Ed.2d 873 (1973); Byrd v. State, 995 So.2d 1008, 1011 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). The Sixth Amendment states, in pertinent part: “[I]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed ... and to be informed of the nature and cause of lent the accusation.” U.S. Const. Amend. VI. The states would have a constitutional obligation to include Apprendi-type factors in their charging instruments only if the notice requirement of the Sixth Amendment, which does apply to the states via Fourteenth Amendment due process, imposed such a requirement. Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, 149, 88 S.Ct. 1444, 20 L.Ed.2d 491 (1968) (<HOLDING>). A state legislature is “vested,” subject to
holding that the second amendment fully applies to state and local regulation through the fourteenth amendment holding that the fourteenth amendment incorporated the sixth amendment right to counsel holding that the confrontation clause is applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment holding second amendment right is incorporated against the states through fourteenth amendment holding the sixth amendment right to a jury trial applies to the states through the fourteenth amendment