§
In re Delgado

15 Cited authorities

  1. Mathis v. United States

    136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016)   Cited 4,434 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court employing the categorical approach "looks to a limited class of documents"

  2. Taylor v. United States

    495 U.S. 575 (1990)   Cited 5,288 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the term "burglary" as used in the Armed Career Criminal Act was to be given its "generic, contemporary meaning" to avoid a scenario in which "a person ... would, or would not, receive a sentence enhancement based on exactly the same conduct, depending on whether the State of his prior conviction happened to call that conduct ‘burglary’ "

  3. Rosemond v. United States

    572 U.S. 65 (2014)   Cited 1,091 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Government must show that a defendant had "advance knowledge" that a co-conspirator would use or carry a firearm to support a § 924(c) conviction

  4. P1eople. v. Hill

    17 Cal.4th 800 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 3,859 times
    Holding the prosecutor committed misconduct insofar as her statement that '"[t]here has to be some evidence on which to base a doubt'" "could reasonably be interpreted as suggesting to the jury she did not have the burden of proving every element of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt"

  5. The People v. McCoy

    25 Cal.4th 1111 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 1,167 times
    Recognizing that “[w]hen two or more persons commit a crime together, both may act in part as the actual perpetrator and in part as the aider and abettor of the other, who also acts in part as an actual perpetrator”

  6. People v. Beeman

    35 Cal.3d 547 (Cal. 1984)   Cited 1,235 times
    Holding that defendant is liable under aiding and abetting theory if he "act[ed] with knowledge of the criminal purpose of the perpetrator and with an intent or purpose either of committing, or of encouraging or facilitating commission of, the offense"

  7. People v. Delgado

    56 Cal.4th 480 (Cal. 2013)   Cited 107 times
    In Delgado, our Supreme Court found that the court's error in failing to instruct the jury on accomplice liability with respect to the defendant on the asportation element of kidnapping was not of federal constitutional dimension because it "did not constitute failure to instruct on an element of the offense and did not unconstitutionally lessen the People's burden of proof."

  8. De Diego v. Sessions

    857 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 2017)   Cited 26 times
    Holding that § 1252(B) bars review of "any discretionary aspect of the agency's decision to deny Diego's application for adjustment of status . . . under 8 U.S.C. § 1159(b)"

  9. State v. Johnson

    207 Wis. 2d 239 (Wis. 1997)   Cited 44 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding legislative acquiescence toMoore v. State, 55 Wis.2d 1, 197 N.W.2d 820

  10. Ortiz-Magana v. Mukasey

    542 F.3d 653 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 26 times
    Holding that assault with a deadly weapon under California state law is a crime of violence

  11. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,720 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status

  12. Section 1227 - Deportable aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1227   Cited 8,037 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General