405 Cited authorities

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (1984) Cited 158,786 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"
United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (2005) Cited 25,377 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory
Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (2000) Cited 26,646 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”
Crawford v. Washington
541 U.S. 36 (2004) Cited 17,414 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"
Blakely v. Washington
542 U.S. 296 (2004) Cited 16,615 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”
Estelle v. Gamble
429 U.S. 97 (1976) Cited 54,825 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government has an obligation to provide medical care to incarcerated persons
Brecht v. Abrahamson
507 U.S. 619 (1993) Cited 11,813 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding that when a court has "never squarely addressed the issue, and ha at most assumed" something in a prior decision, it is "free to address the issue on the merits"
Davis v. Washington
547 U.S. 813 (2006) Cited 4,804 times 32 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements made "in the course of police interrogation" are testimonial when made under "circumstances objectively indicat[ing] ... that the primary purpose of the interrogation [was] to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution"
Cunningham v. California
549 U.S. 270 (2007) Cited 4,292 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"
Kyles v. Whitley
514 U.S. 419 (1995) Cited 7,260 times 36 Legal Analyses
Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense
Section 187 - Murder
Cal. Pen. Code § 187 Cited 19,826 times
Defining murder as "the unlawful killing of a human being . . . with malice aforethought."
Section 211 - Robbery
Cal. Pen. Code § 211 Cited 14,296 times 3 Legal Analyses
Requiring taking of personal property of another
Section Amendment VI - Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions
U.S. Const. amend. VI Cited 28,157 times 1 Legal Analyses
Granting the accused the right to be tried "by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed."
Section 459 - Burglary
Cal. Pen. Code § 459 Cited 11,891 times 4 Legal Analyses
Providing that a "person who enters" certain locations "with intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony is guilty of burglary"
Section Amendment V - Rights of Persons
U.S. Const. amend. V Cited 19,297 times 5 Legal Analyses
Requiring that crimes be prosecuted on a presentment or indictment
Section 190.2 - Penalty for defendant found guilty of first-degree murder with special circumstance
Cal. Pen. Code § 190.2 Cited 5,943 times 4 Legal Analyses
Prescribing penalty of death or LWOP for special circumstance murder
Section 15
Cal. Const. art. I § 15 Cited 3,313 times
Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”
Section 460 - Burglary of first degree; burglary of second degree
Cal. Pen. Code § 460 Cited 3,191 times
Sweeping so broadly as to cover even dishonest door-to-door salesmen
Section 7
Cal. Const. art. I § 7 Cited 2,114 times 5 Legal Analyses
Guaranteeing due process and equal protection
Section 16
Cal. Const. art. I § 16 Cited 1,775 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"

PEOPLE v. PEREZ

405 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 the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory

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 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"

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”

Holding that the government has an obligation to provide medical care to incarcerated persons

Holding that when a court has "never squarely addressed the issue, and ha at most assumed" something in a prior decision, it is "free to address the issue on the merits"

Holding that statements made "in the course of police interrogation" are testimonial when made under "circumstances objectively indicat[ing] ... that the primary purpose of the interrogation [was] to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution"

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"

Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense

Defining murder as "the unlawful killing of a human being . . . with malice aforethought."

Requiring taking of personal property of another

Granting the accused the right to be tried "by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed."

Providing that a "person who enters" certain locations "with intent to commit grand or petit larceny or any felony is guilty of burglary"

Requiring that crimes be prosecuted on a presentment or indictment

Prescribing penalty of death or LWOP for special circumstance murder

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

Sweeping so broadly as to cover even dishonest door-to-door salesmen

Guaranteeing due process and equal protection

Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"