19 Cited authorities

Graham v. Florida
560 U.S. 48 (2010) Cited 4,406 times 46 Legal Analyses
Holding life without parole sentences unconstitutional for non-homicide juvenile offenders
Atkins v. Virginia
536 U.S. 304 (2002) Cited 3,123 times 54 Legal Analyses
Holding that it violates the Eighth Amendment to execute intellectually disabled defendants
Panetti v. Quarterman
551 U.S. 930 (2007) Cited 1,989 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that a petition raising a previously unripe claim of incompetency was not a second or successive petition under AEDPA
Arizona v. Youngblood
488 U.S. 51 (1988) Cited 3,873 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that "unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law"
Perry v. New Hampshire
565 U.S. 228 (2012) Cited 1,358 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts need not inquire into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when it is not procured "under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances"
United States v. Wade
388 U.S. 218 (1967) Cited 8,069 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Sixth Amendment provides the right to counsel at a postindictment lineup even though the Fifth Amendment is not implicated
Hall v. Florida
572 U.S. 701 (2014) Cited 577 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the law require[d]" that Hall have an "opportunity to present evidence" concerning his "adaptive functioning" when his lowest score was a 71, even though he also obtained six other IQ scores, including an 80
State v. Henderson
208 N.J. 208 (N.J. 2011) Cited 704 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding a jury instruction on cross-racial identification should be given whenever cross-racial identification is in issue at trial
Watkins v. Sowders
449 U.S. 341 (1981) Cited 364 times
Holding that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not require a per se rule that a hearing outside the presence of the jury be conducted whenever a defendant challenges the admissibility of a witness's identification
Commonwealth v. Walker
92 A.3d 766 (Pa. 2014) Cited 144 times
Holding admission of expert testimony in the field of human memory, perception, and recall, for purposes of challenging eyewitness identification of defendant, was not per se impermissible, but subject to trial court's discretion

The People, Respondent,v.Otis Boone, Appellant.

19 Cited authorities

Holding life without parole sentences unconstitutional for non-homicide juvenile offenders

Holding that it violates the Eighth Amendment to execute intellectually disabled defendants

Holding that a petition raising a previously unripe claim of incompetency was not a second or successive petition under AEDPA

Holding that "unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law"

Holding that courts need not inquire into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when it is not procured "under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances"

Holding that the Sixth Amendment provides the right to counsel at a postindictment lineup even though the Fifth Amendment is not implicated

Holding that "the law require[d]" that Hall have an "opportunity to present evidence" concerning his "adaptive functioning" when his lowest score was a 71, even though he also obtained six other IQ scores, including an 80

Holding a jury instruction on cross-racial identification should be given whenever cross-racial identification is in issue at trial

Holding that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not require a per se rule that a hearing outside the presence of the jury be conducted whenever a defendant challenges the admissibility of a witness's identification

Holding admission of expert testimony in the field of human memory, perception, and recall, for purposes of challenging eyewitness identification of defendant, was not per se impermissible, but subject to trial court's discretion