United States v. Booker

Holding the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory

Apprendi v. New Jersey

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”

Crawford v. Washington

Holding 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"

Jackson v. Virginia

Holding that courts conducting review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction should view the "evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution"

Wiggins v. Smith

Holding that counsel's performance was deficient when they failed to expand their investigation into the defendant's life history "after having acquired only rudimentary knowledge of his history from a narrow set of sources," especially when those sources indicated the existence of helpful mitigation evidence

Miranda v. Arizona

Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment

Tennard v. Dretke

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"

Davis v. Washington

Holding 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"

Village of Willowbrook v. Olech

Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"

Kyles v. Whitley

Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense

Section 15

Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”

Section 7

Guaranteeing due process and equal protection

Section 16

Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"

Section 9 - Powers Denied to Congress

Prohibiting Congress

Section 17

Prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment

Rule 8.630 - Briefs by parties and amicus curiae