§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. BROWN

Respondent’s Petition for Review

43 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Bolin

    18 Cal.4th 297 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 3,658 times
    Holding that defendant's act of retrieving gun after arguing with victim supported finding that murder was premeditated

  2. People v. Maury

    30 Cal.4th 342 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 2,549 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant must renew a motion for a change of venue after voir dire to preserve the issue for appeal

  3. People v. Ledesma

    43 Cal.3d 171 (Cal. 1987)   Cited 2,832 times
    Holding that counsel was prejudicially ineffective for failure to investigate mental illness evidence despite expert's report stating that defendant was competent to stand trial because report raised other issues

  4. People v. Price

    1 Cal.4th 324 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 1,808 times
    Holding under similar statute that prosecution need not prove someone else stole property, and that "receiving" conviction may be upheld despite evidence strongly suggesting that defendant also stole property

  5. People v. Superior Court (Alvarez)

    14 Cal.4th 968 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 1,374 times
    Holding that a trial court's discretion under Cal.Penal Code § 17(b) to reduce a "wobbler" offense is not eliminated by the Three Strikes law but is reviewable

  6. People v. Mayfield

    14 Cal.4th 668 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 1,314 times
    Concluding defense counsel did not provide ineffective assistance in failing to present certain potentially exculpatory evidence where "counsel's decision not to elicit this evidence was a reasonable tactical decision"

  7. In re Estrada

    63 Cal.2d 740 (Cal. 1965)   Cited 4,249 times
    Holding that a defendant "is entitled to the ameliorating benefits of the statutes as amended" if "the amendatory statute lessening punishment becomes effective prior to the date the judgment of conviction becomes final"

  8. People v. Gurule

    28 Cal.4th 557 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 928 times
    Finding no error or violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights from the trial court's refusal to allow a read-back of counsel's argument

  9. People v. Lewis and Oliver

    39 Cal.4th 970 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 784 times
    Holding that, because defendants did not object to trial court's comments to jury regarding scheduling, "they have forfeited their state law claim that it interfered with the jury's deliberations and coerced a verdict. They have also forfeited their related constitutional claims."

  10. People v. Burgener

    29 Cal.4th 833 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 758 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding no error but exercising supervisory powers to disapprove "race-conscious" jury assignment procedure

  11. Rule 8.1110 - Partial publication

    Cal. R. 8.1110   Cited 2,325 times

    (a)Order for partial publication A majority of the rendering court may certify for publication any part of an opinion meeting a standard for publication under rule 8.1105. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Opinion contents The published part of the opinion must specify the part or parts not certified for publication. All material, factual and legal, including the disposition, that aids in the application or interpretation of the published part must be published. (c) Construction For