31 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Olano

    507 U.S. 725 (1993)   Cited 10,454 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plain error review requires a reviewing court to refrain from correcting an error unless it is plain and affects "substantial rights," such that the error "seriously affect the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings"
  2. Neder v. United States

    527 U.S. 1 (1999)   Cited 4,586 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless
  3. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 22,359 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
  4. Delaware v. Van Arsdall

    475 U.S. 673 (1986)   Cited 6,888 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a restriction on defendant's ability to crossexamine witness in violation of Sixth Amendment was non-structural error
  5. Arizona v. Fulminante

    499 U.S. 279 (1991)   Cited 5,005 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that involuntary confessions are subject to harmless-error review
  6. Sullivan v. Louisiana

    508 U.S. 275 (1993)   Cited 3,122 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "
  7. Schaffer v. Weast

    546 U.S. 49 (2005)   Cited 898 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that this is the default rule
  8. Rose v. Clark

    478 U.S. 570 (1986)   Cited 1,738 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an unconstitutional instruction regarding malice in a murder case was subject to harmless-error analysis
  9. Washington v. Recuenco

    548 U.S. 212 (2006)   Cited 792 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding Blakely violations are subject to harmless error review
  10. United States v. Hasting

    461 U.S. 499 (1983)   Cited 1,534 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Chapman mandates harmless error analysis of Griffin error
  11. Section 13

    Cal. Const. art. VI § 13   Cited 4,010 times
    Requiring a "miscarriage of justice"
  12. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 305 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer

  13. Rule 8.516 - Issues on review

    Cal. R. 8.516   Cited 109 times

    (a)Issues to be briefed and argued (1) On or after ordering review, the Supreme Court may specify the issues to be briefed and argued. Unless the court orders otherwise, the parties must limit their briefs and arguments to those issues and any issues fairly included in them. (2) Notwithstanding an order specifying issues under (1), the court may, on reasonable notice, order oral argument on fewer or additional issues or on the entire cause. (b)Issues to be decided (1) The Supreme Court may decide