230 Cited authorities

  1. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 26,616 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 16,608 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. Miranda v. Arizona

    384 U.S. 436 (1966)   Cited 60,216 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment
  4. Batson v. Kentucky

    476 U.S. 79 (1986)   Cited 15,224 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes
  5. Cunningham v. California

    549 U.S. 270 (2007)   Cited 4,291 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "jury-trial guarantee proscribes a sentencing scheme that allows a judge to impose a sentence above the statutory maximum based on a fact, other than a prior conviction, not found by the jury or admitted by the defendant"
  6. Ring v. Arizona

    536 U.S. 584 (2002)   Cited 4,996 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 3,488 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 23,455 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
  9. Arizona v. Fulminante

    499 U.S. 279 (1991)   Cited 5,281 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that involuntary confessions are subject to harmless-error review
  10. Miller-El v. Dretke

    545 U.S. 231 (2005)   Cited 2,695 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prosecutor “would have cleared up any misunderstanding by asking further questions” if he truly considered a race-neutral characteristic grounds for a peremptory strike
  11. Section Amendment XIV - Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection

    U.S. Const. amend. XIV   Cited 11,383 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting deprivations by “State”
  12. Section 5 - Continuations

    Cal. Pen. Code § 5   Cited 193 times
    Attempting to dissuade a witness from testifying, § 136.1
  13. Rule 8.600 - Renumbered effective April 25, 2019

    Cal. R. 8.600   Cited 1 times

    Cal. R. Ct. 8.600 Rule 8.600 renumbered as rule 8.603.