5 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 146,599 times   173 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prejudice for IAC claims requires showing "that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different"
  2. Miller-El v. Dretke

    545 U.S. 231 (2005)   Cited 2,515 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
  3. People v. Mendoza Tello

    15 Cal.4th 264 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 1,634 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding in substance that ineffectiveness claim was "hybrid" in nature and reversing intermediate appellate holding that error was of "record" variety that required reversal
  4. People v. Lenix

    44 Cal.4th 602 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 598 times
    Concluding that prior practice of refusing to engage in comparative juror analysis for first time on appeal “unduly restricts review based on the entire record” but acknowledging that “comparative juror analysis on a cold appellate record has inherent limitations” that must be taken into consideration
  5. People v. Lopez

    42 Cal.4th 960 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 513 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding the prosecutor's remark in rebuttal," 'I think [defense counsel's] client is guilty, '" did not constitute prosecutorial error because "the prosecutor's comment did not imply that she based her belief in defendant's guilt on evidence not presented at trial. To the contrary: Because her statement that she believed defendant was guilty immediately followed her comment that, in her view, defense counsel's cross-examination of the victims demonstrated that they were credible, a reasonable juror would most likely infer that the prosecutor based her belief in defendant's guilt on the credibility of the victims' testimony at trial."