339 Cited authorities

  1. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 26,644 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. Crawford v. Washington

    541 U.S. 36 (2004)   Cited 17,411 times   82 Legal Analyses
    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"
  3. Blakely v. Washington

    542 U.S. 296 (2004)   Cited 16,615 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”
  4. Jackson v. Virginia

    443 U.S. 307 (1979)   Cited 77,625 times   16 Legal Analyses
    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"
  5. Brecht v. Abrahamson

    507 U.S. 619 (1993)   Cited 11,812 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when a court has "never squarely addressed the issue, and ha at most assumed" something in a prior decision, it is "free to address the issue on the merits"
  6. Ring v. Arizona

    536 U.S. 584 (2002)   Cited 4,999 times   50 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”
  7. Roper v. Simmons

    543 U.S. 551 (2005)   Cited 3,496 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"
  8. Mathews v. Eldridge

    424 U.S. 319 (1976)   Cited 15,736 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a procedure based on written submissions was adequate because it included safeguards against mistake including that the agency informed the recipient of its tentative assessment and the evidence supporting it and an opportunity was then afforded the recipient to submit additional evidence "enabling him to challenge directly the accuracy of information in his file as well as the correctness of the agency's tentative conclusions"
  9. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 23,474 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
  10. Delaware v. Van Arsdall

    475 U.S. 673 (1986)   Cited 7,279 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a restriction on defendant's ability to crossexamine witness in violation of Sixth Amendment was non-structural error
  11. Section 190.2 - Penalty for defendant found guilty of first-degree murder with special circumstance

    Cal. Pen. Code § 190.2   Cited 5,938 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Prescribing penalty of death or LWOP for special circumstance murder
  12. Section 848 - Continuing criminal enterprise

    21 U.S.C. § 848   Cited 3,825 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the court's authority in certain situations to "impose a sentence, other than death, authorized by law"
  13. Section 15

    Cal. Const. art. I § 15   Cited 3,312 times
    Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”
  14. Section 37.07 - Verdict Must Be General; Separate Hearing On Proper Punishment

    Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 37.07   Cited 2,411 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that "[r]egardless of the plea and whether the punishment be assessed by the judge or the jury, evidence may be offered by the state and the defendant as to any matter the court deems relevant to sentencing, including but not limited to the prior criminal record of the defendant, his general reputation, his character, an opinion regarding his character, the circumstances of the offense for which he is being tried"
  15. Section 7

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 2,113 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection
  16. Section 16

    Cal. Const. art. I § 16   Cited 1,775 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"
  17. Section 17

    Cal. Const. art. I § 17   Cited 1,408 times
    Prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment
  18. Section 2929.04 - Death penalty or imprisonment - aggravating and mitigating factors

    Ohio Rev. Code § 2929.04   Cited 1,157 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the jury is to weigh against the aggravating circumstances, inter alia, "the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history, character, and background of the offender"
  19. Section 37.071 - Procedure In Capital Case

    Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 37.071   Cited 1,041 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Identifying "special issues" to be considered by the sentencer when determining the appropriate sentence
  20. Section 190.3 - Death penalty for defendant found guilty of first degree murder with special circumstance

    Cal. Pen. Code § 190.3   Cited 821 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Providing that, "[i]n determining the penalty, the trier of fact shall take into account" any relevant listed factors