47 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Booker

    543 U.S. 220 (2005)   Cited 25,326 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory
  2. United States v. Cotton

    535 U.S. 625 (2002)   Cited 2,931 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the indictment's failure to allege facts about drug quantity, which increased the statutory maximum sentence, did not affect the fairness or integrity of the judicial proceedings because the proof of drug quantity was overwhelming
  3. State v. Danielson

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9814 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 9,406 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a "legally sufficient verdict can be against the weight of the evidence"
  4. Napue v. Illinois

    360 U.S. 264 (1959)   Cited 4,787 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the prosecution violates due process when it knowingly offers or fails to correct false or misleading testimony
  5. People v. Hawkins

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9254 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 1,872 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to preserve for appellate review a challenge to the legal sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction, a defendant must move for a trial order of dismissal, and the argument must be "specifically directed" at the error being argued
  6. People v. Gray

    86 N.Y.2d 10 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 3,220 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the issue of evidentiary sufficiency must be preserved for appellate review
  7. People v. Turner

    2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 8766 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 520 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding appellate counsel ineffective for not raising ineffectiveness of trial counsel on appeal
  8. Henry v. Poole

    409 F.3d 48 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 441 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in order to sustain a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must establish that “absent [counsel's] errors, the factfinder would have had a reasonable doubt respecting guilt”
  9. People v. Feingold

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 5233 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 347 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Ruling that depraved indifference to human life, rather than recklessness, is the applicable mens rea in statutes in which the former appears
  10. People v. Suarez

    2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 9811 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 322 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding depraved indifference charge was not appropriate where defendant intended to kill an individual and did kill that individual, even if the killing was done in a depraved manner.