24 Cited authorities

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (1984) Cited 158,807 times 176 Legal Analyses
Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"
Jackson v. Virginia
443 U.S. 307 (1979) Cited 77,635 times 16 Legal Analyses
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"
Sullivan v. Louisiana
508 U.S. 275 (1993) Cited 3,280 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "
People v. Contes
60 N.Y.2d 620 (N.Y. 1983) Cited 11,959 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating the standard for review of the legal sufficiency of evidence in a criminal case is whether "after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt"
Ulster County Court v. Allen
442 U.S. 140 (1979) Cited 1,857 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that criminal defendants could not mount a facial challenge to a statute that had been constitutionally applied at their trial
People v. Stultz
2 N.Y.3d 277 (N.Y. 2004) Cited 3,233 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding "a defendant's showing of prejudice [to be] a significant but not indispensable element in assessing meaningful representation," focusing instead on "the fairness of the proceedings as a whole"
People v. Benevento
91 N.Y.2d 708 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 4,215 times 2 Legal Analyses
In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."
People v. Gray
86 N.Y.2d 10 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 3,231 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the issue of evidentiary sufficiency must be preserved for appellate review
People v. Caban
5 N.Y.3d 143 (N.Y. 2005) Cited 1,639 times
Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth
Carella v. California
491 U.S. 263 (1989) Cited 601 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that an instruction containing an unconstitutional conclusive presumption was subject to harmless-error analysis
Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1182 Cited 9,711 times 66 Legal Analyses
Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

The People, Respondent,v.Oliverio Galindo, Appellant.

24 Cited authorities

Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

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"

Holding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "

Stating the standard for review of the legal sufficiency of evidence in a criminal case is whether "after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt"

Holding that criminal defendants could not mount a facial challenge to a statute that had been constitutionally applied at their trial

Holding "a defendant's showing of prejudice [to be] a significant but not indispensable element in assessing meaningful representation," focusing instead on "the fairness of the proceedings as a whole"

In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."

Holding that the issue of evidentiary sufficiency must be preserved for appellate review

Holding conspirators' statements admissible as verbal acts to prove existence of conspiracy but not, absent independent evidence of the conspiracy, for their truth

Holding that an instruction containing an unconstitutional conclusive presumption was subject to harmless-error analysis

Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"