395 Cited authorities

  1. Williams v. Taylor

    529 U.S. 362 (2000)   Cited 34,931 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding that counsel's performance was deficient when their investigation failed to uncover "extensive records" filled with mitigation evidence concerning the defendant's family history, education, mental health, and rehabilitation
  2. United States v. Booker

    543 U.S. 220 (2005)   Cited 24,464 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory
  3. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 25,426 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”
  4. Blakely v. Washington

    542 U.S. 296 (2004)   Cited 16,308 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”
  5. Jackson v. Virginia

    443 U.S. 307 (1979)   Cited 73,863 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court must presume trier of fact resolved all inferences in favor of the prosecution "even if it does not affirmatively appear in the record"
  6. Estelle v. Gamble

    429 U.S. 97 (1976)   Cited 48,159 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the proper forum for challenging a medical judgment was under state medical malpractice law
  7. Wiggins v. Smith

    539 U.S. 510 (2003)   Cited 8,724 times   45 Legal Analyses
    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
  8. Cunningham v. California

    549 U.S. 270 (2007)   Cited 4,186 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"
  9. Ring v. Arizona

    536 U.S. 584 (2002)   Cited 4,856 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”
  10. Kyles v. Whitley

    514 U.S. 419 (1995)   Cited 6,704 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense
  11. Section Amendment XIV - Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection

    U.S. Const. amend. XIV   Cited 10,336 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting states from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”
  12. Rule 804 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-When the Declarant Is Unavailable as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 804   Cited 3,654 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing an exception to the hearsay exclusionary rule when the party against whom the statement is offered has engaged in wrongdoing which procures the unavailability of the declarant
  13. Section 15

    Cal. Const. art. I § 15   Cited 3,150 times
    Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”
  14. Section 7

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 1,923 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection
  15. Section 17

    Cal. Const. art. I § 17   Cited 1,296 times
    Prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment
  16. Section 1

    Cal. Const. art. I § 1   Cited 960 times
    Providing "[a]ll people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights," including the right of "privacy"
  17. Section 5

    Cal. Const. art. I § 5   Cited 10 times

    The military is subordinate to civil power. A standing army may not be maintained in peacetime. Soldiers may not be quartered in any house in wartime except as prescribed by law, or in peacetime without the owner's consent. Cal. Const. art. I § 5