137 Cited authorities

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (1984) Cited 158,859 times 176 Legal Analyses
Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"
Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (2000) Cited 26,650 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”
Estelle v. McGuire
502 U.S. 62 (1991) Cited 19,981 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions
United States v. Olano
507 U.S. 725 (1993) Cited 11,255 times 25 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"
Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966) Cited 60,305 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
Chapman v. California
386 U.S. 18 (1967) Cited 23,490 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
McDonald v. City of Chicago
561 U.S. 742 (2010) Cited 2,276 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Second Amendment applies to the states, through incorporation under the Fourteenth Amendment
United States v. Cronic
466 U.S. 648 (1984) Cited 7,368 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding defendant is constructively denied counsel during critical stage of criminal proceedings where counsel, inter alia, "fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing"
McMann v. Richardson
397 U.S. 759 (1970) Cited 7,413 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that even a possible misjudgment about admissibility of evidence is not ineffective assistance.
Wainwright v. Witt
469 U.S. 412 (1985) Cited 3,274 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that juror bias determination is a question of fact, even though "[t]he trial judge is of course applying some kind of legal standard to what he sees and hears"
Section 1201 - Kidnapping
18 U.S.C. § 1201 Cited 3,383 times 9 Legal Analyses
Providing for "imprisonment for any term of years or for life"
Section 15
Cal. Const. art. I § 15 Cited 3,314 times
Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”

PEOPLE v. GRIMES

137 Cited authorities

Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

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”

Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions

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"

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

Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

Holding that the Second Amendment applies to the states, through incorporation under the Fourteenth Amendment

Holding defendant is constructively denied counsel during critical stage of criminal proceedings where counsel, inter alia, "fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing"

Holding that even a possible misjudgment about admissibility of evidence is not ineffective assistance.

Holding that juror bias determination is a question of fact, even though "[t]he trial judge is of course applying some kind of legal standard to what he sees and hears"

Providing for "imprisonment for any term of years or for life"

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