276 Cited authorities

  1. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 25,694 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt”
  2. Blakely v. Washington

    542 U.S. 296 (2004)   Cited 16,349 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[w]hen a judge inflicts punishment that the jury's verdict alone does not allow, the jury has not found all the facts ‘which the law makes essential to the punishment,’ and the judge exceeds his proper authority”
  3. Jackson v. Virginia

    443 U.S. 307 (1979)   Cited 74,192 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt"
  4. Estelle v. McGuire

    502 U.S. 62 (1991)   Cited 18,336 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions
  5. Ring v. Arizona

    536 U.S. 584 (2002)   Cited 4,870 times   51 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”
  6. Kyles v. Whitley

    514 U.S. 419 (1995)   Cited 6,754 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense
  7. Roper v. Simmons

    543 U.S. 551 (2005)   Cited 3,185 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"
  8. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 22,414 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
  9. Faretta v. California

    422 U.S. 806 (1975)   Cited 11,783 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant's right to self-representation was denied when he made his requests "weeks before trial" without any indication that the defendant was required to reassert his request during the trial
  10. Arizona v. Fulminante

    499 U.S. 279 (1991)   Cited 5,021 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that involuntary confessions are subject to harmless-error review
  11. Section 15

    Cal. Const. art. I § 15   Cited 3,153 times
    Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”
  12. Section 7

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 1,923 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection
  13. Section 16

    Cal. Const. art. I § 16   Cited 1,694 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"
  14. Section 17

    Cal. Const. art. I § 17   Cited 1,297 times
    Prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment