23 Cited authorities

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (1984) Cited 158,880 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"
Crawford v. Washington
541 U.S. 36 (2004) Cited 17,419 times 82 Legal Analyses
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"
Chapman v. California
386 U.S. 18 (1967) Cited 23,491 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
Michigan v. Bryant
562 U.S. 344 (2011) Cited 1,583 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements made to police concerning an ongoing emergency are not testimonial
Ohio v. Roberts
448 U.S. 56 (1980) Cited 4,632 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that the question of good-faith effort is a question of reasonableness, and a prosecutor is not required to do a futile act
California v. Green
399 U.S. 149 (1970) Cited 2,915 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the Confrontation Clause does not require excluding from evidence the prior statements of a witness who concedes making those statements"
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."
Tennessee v. Street
471 U.S. 409 (1985) Cited 775 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that non-hearsay admissions do not raise "Confrontation Clause concerns"
Ryan v. Miller
303 F.3d 231 (2d Cir. 2002) Cited 249 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding that a "blanket statement" that "[t]he defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit" constituted adjudication on the merits
People v. Morris
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 6633 (N.Y. 2013) Cited 174 times
Holding that evidence of a 911 call accusing defendant of robbing someone at gunpoint was relevant background information that helped explain the aggressive conduct of police when arresting the defendant
Section 2254 - State custody; remedies in Federal courts
28 U.S.C. § 2254 Cited 204,508 times 341 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a determination of a factual issue made by a State court shall be presumed to be correct" and "[t]he applicant shall have the burden of rebutting the presumption of correctness by clear and convincing evidence"

The People, Respondent,v.Joshue DeJesus, Appellant.

23 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 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"

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

Holding that statements made to police concerning an ongoing emergency are not testimonial

Holding that the question of good-faith effort is a question of reasonableness, and a prosecutor is not required to do a futile act

Holding that "the Confrontation Clause does not require excluding from evidence the prior statements of a witness who concedes making those statements"

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 non-hearsay admissions do not raise "Confrontation Clause concerns"

Finding that a "blanket statement" that "[t]he defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit" constituted adjudication on the merits

Holding that evidence of a 911 call accusing defendant of robbing someone at gunpoint was relevant background information that helped explain the aggressive conduct of police when arresting the defendant

Holding that "a determination of a factual issue made by a State court shall be presumed to be correct" and "[t]he applicant shall have the burden of rebutting the presumption of correctness by clear and convincing evidence"