Apprendi v. New Jersey

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

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

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”

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"

Tennard v. Dretke

Holding that petitioner was entitled to a COA on his Penry claim where his evidence of low IQ and impaired intellectual functioning had "mitigating dimension beyond the impact it has on the individual's ability to act deliberately"

Davis v. Washington

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"

Strickler v. Greene

Holding that a newspaper article detailing that a witness had been interviewed by the police did not suffice to put a defendant's lawyer on notice that records and evidence concerning the witness existed and had been suppressed

Cunningham v. California

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

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

Ring v. Arizona

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”

Section 187 - Murder

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

Section 190.2 - Penalty for defendant found guilty of first-degree murder with special circumstance

Prescribing penalty of death or LWOP for special circumstance murder

Section 1043 - Peace or custodial officer personnel records

Addressing "discovery . . . of peace or custodial officer personnel records or records maintained pursuant to 832.5 of the Penal Code"

Section 1054.1 - Disclosure to defendant

Requiring prosecutor to disclose to defendant "[t]he names and addresses of persons the prosecutor intends to call as witnesses at trial."

Section 1054 - Purposes

Expressing purposes of reciprocal discovery to ascertain truth, save court time, and protect victims and witnesses "in criminal cases"

Rule 4.414 - Criteria affecting probation