§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. HAJEK & VO

Appellant, Stephen Edward Hajek, Second Supplemental Opening Brief

27 Cited authorities

  1. Smith v. Phillips

    455 U.S. 209 (1982)   Cited 4,856 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a juror's pending job application with the prosecutor's office required a post-trial hearing on juror bias

  2. Donnelly v. DeChristoforo

    416 U.S. 637 (1974)   Cited 6,219 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, because a prosecutor's statement during closing argument was ambiguous, it was not so misleading and prejudicial that it deprived the defendant of due process

  3. Crane v. Kentucky

    476 U.S. 683 (1986)   Cited 3,286 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an opportunity to present a complete defense "would be an empty one if the State were permitted to exclude competent, reliable evidence bearing on the credibility of a confession when such evidence is central to the defendant's claim of innocence"

  4. P1eople. v. Hill

    17 Cal.4th 800 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 3,805 times
    Holding the prosecutor committed misconduct insofar as her statement that '"[t]here has to be some evidence on which to base a doubt'" "could reasonably be interpreted as suggesting to the jury she did not have the burden of proving every element of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt"

  5. People v. Scott

    9 Cal.4th 331 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 3,910 times
    Holding that "complaints about the manner in which the trial court exercises its sentencing discretion and articulates its supporting reasons cannot be raised for the first time on appeal"

  6. People v. Price

    1 Cal.4th 324 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 1,811 times
    Holding under similar statute that prosecution need not prove someone else stole property, and that "receiving" conviction may be upheld despite evidence strongly suggesting that defendant also stole property

  7. People v. Crittenden

    9 Cal.4th 83 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 1,187 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “the prosecutor may not argue that the absence of a mitigating factor constitutes the presence of an aggravating factor”

  8. People v. Smith

    24 Cal.4th 849 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 948 times
    Holding that the Court of Appeal may correct erroneous imposition of a parole revocation fine without remanding for further proceedings

  9. People v. Barnwell

    41 Cal.4th 1038 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 574 times
    Holding that the testimony of a single witness that satisfied the substantial evidence standard is sufficient to uphold the jury's finding

  10. People v. Gonzalez

    51 Cal.3d 1179 (Cal. 1990)   Cited 727 times
    Holding that the “bare filing” of a petition for writ of habeas corpus does not trigger a right to discovery because a habeas corpus petition that fails to state a prima facie case for relief creates no cause or proceeding that would confer discovery jurisdiction

  11. Section 12022.5 - Personal use of firearm in commission of felony or attempted felony

    Cal. Pen. Code § 12022.5   Cited 8,190 times
    Providing for sentence enhancement

  12. Rule 8.200 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae

    Cal. R. 8.200   Cited 715 times

    (a)Parties' briefs (1) Each appellant must serve and file an appellant's opening brief. (2) Each respondent must serve and file a respondent's brief. (3) Each appellant may serve and file a reply brief. (4) No other brief may be filed except with the permission of the presiding justice, unless it qualifies under (b) or (c)(7). (5) Instead of filing a brief, or as part of its brief, a party may join in or adopt by reference all or part of a brief in the same or a related appeal. (Subd (a) amended