272 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Booker

    543 U.S. 220 (2005)   Cited 24,461 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory
  2. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 25,425 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”
  3. 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”
  4. Crawford v. Washington

    541 U.S. 36 (2004)   Cited 16,266 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"
  5. 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"
  6. 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”
  7. Santosky v. Kramer

    455 U.S. 745 (1982)   Cited 7,978 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[b]efore a State may sever ... the rights of parents in their natural child, due process requires that the State support its allegations by at least clear and convincing evidence"
  8. 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
  9. Atkins v. Virginia

    536 U.S. 304 (2002)   Cited 2,938 times   54 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the execution of mentally retarded offenders violates the Eighth Amendment
  10. Barker v. Wingo

    407 U.S. 514 (1972)   Cited 10,768 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendant who fails to demand speedy trial does not forever waive that constitutional right
  11. Section 15

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

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 1,923 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection
  13. Section 16

    Cal. Const. art. I § 16   Cited 1,692 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"
  14. Section 17

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