§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. O'MALLEY (JAMES FRANCIS)

Appellant’s Opening Brief

221 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,593 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"

  2. Batson v. Kentucky

    476 U.S. 79 (1986)   Cited 15,232 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes

  3. Tennard v. Dretke

    542 U.S. 274 (2004)   Cited 5,493 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that petitioner was entitled to a COA on his Penry claim where his evidence of low IQ and impaired intellectual functioning had "mitigating dimension beyond the impact it has on the individual's ability to act deliberately"

  4. Ring v. Arizona

    536 U.S. 584 (2002)   Cited 4,998 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[i]f a State makes an increase in a defendant's authorized punishment contingent on the finding of a fact, that fact—no matter how the State labels it—must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt”

  5. Neder v. United States

    527 U.S. 1 (1999)   Cited 4,937 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless

  6. Roper v. Simmons

    543 U.S. 551 (2005)   Cited 3,490 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"

  7. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 23,461 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

  8. Atkins v. Virginia

    536 U.S. 304 (2002)   Cited 3,121 times   54 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it violates the Eighth Amendment to execute intellectually disabled defendants

  9. Arizona v. Fulminante

    499 U.S. 279 (1991)   Cited 5,281 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that involuntary confessions are subject to harmless-error review

  10. Miller-El v. Dretke

    545 U.S. 231 (2005)   Cited 2,698 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prosecutor “would have cleared up any misunderstanding by asking further questions” if he truly considered a race-neutral characteristic grounds for a peremptory strike

  11. Section 3591 - Sentence of death

    18 U.S.C. § 3591   Cited 538 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Listing mitigating factors to be considered "in determining whether a sentence of death is to be imposed"

  12. Section 45-5-102 - Deliberate homicide

    Mont. Code § 45-5-102   Cited 80 times

    (1) A person commits the offense of deliberate homicide if: (a) the person purposely or knowingly causes the death of another human being; (b) the person attempts to commit, commits, or is legally accountable for the attempt or commission of robbery, sexual intercourse without consent, arson, burglary, kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, felonious escape, assault with a weapon, aggravated assault, or any other forcible felony and in the course of the forcible felony or flight thereafter, the person

  13. Rule 8.630 - Briefs by parties and amicus curiae

    Cal. R. 8.630   Cited 16 times

    (a)Contents and form Except as provided in this rule, briefs in appeals from judgments of death must comply as nearly as possible with rules 8.200 and 8.204. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Length (1) A brief produced on a computer must not exceed the following limits, including footnotes: (A) Appellant's opening brief: 102,000 words. (B) Respondent's brief: 102,000 words. If the Chief Justice permits the appellant to file an opening brief that exceeds the limit set in (1)(A) or