Crawford v. Washington
541 U.S. 36 (2004) Cited 17,395 times 82 Legal AnalysesHolding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause bars "admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination"
Davis v. Washington
547 U.S. 813 (2006) Cited 4,794 times 32 Legal AnalysesHolding that statements made "in the course of police interrogation" are testimonial when made under "circumstances objectively indicat[ing] ... that the primary purpose of the interrogation [was] to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution"
Melendez–Diaz v. Massachusetts
557 U.S. 305 (2009) Cited 3,546 times 46 Legal AnalysesHolding that a certification that material seized by the police included cocaine was testimonial
Roper v. Simmons
543 U.S. 551 (2005) Cited 3,490 times 38 Legal AnalysesHolding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"
Chapman v. California
386 U.S. 18 (1967) Cited 23,463 times 28 Legal AnalysesHolding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
Delaware v. Van Arsdall
475 U.S. 673 (1986) Cited 7,275 times 9 Legal AnalysesHolding that a restriction on defendant's ability to crossexamine witness in violation of Sixth Amendment was non-structural error
In re Winship
397 U.S. 358 (1970) Cited 11,640 times 24 Legal AnalysesHolding that the government must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt
Michigan v. Bryant
562 U.S. 344 (2011) Cited 1,578 times 12 Legal AnalysesHolding that statements made to police concerning an ongoing emergency are not testimonial
Bullcoming v. New Mexico
564 U.S. 647 (2011) Cited 1,546 times 22 Legal AnalysesHolding a certification of the blood alcohol content of a sample to be testimonial
Sullivan v. Louisiana
508 U.S. 275 (1993) Cited 3,277 times 14 Legal AnalysesHolding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "
Section 1101 - Evidence of character to prove conduct
Cal. Evid. Code § 1101 Cited 6,040 times 2 Legal AnalysesRegarding admissibility of character evidence
Section 15
Cal. Const. art. I § 15 Cited 3,311 timesAffording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”
Section 7
Cal. Const. art. I § 7 Cited 2,109 times 5 Legal AnalysesGuaranteeing due process and equal protection
Section 800 - Lay witness opinion testimony
Cal. Evid. Code § 800 Cited 640 timesRequiring lay opinion testimony be "[h]elpful to a clear understanding of testimony"