26 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Breverman

    19 Cal.4th 142 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 2,385 times
    Holding that the failure to instruct on a lesser included offense in a noncapital case is, at most, an error of California law alone subject only to state standards of reversibility
  2. People v. Rodrigues

    8 Cal.4th 1060 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 1,455 times
    Holding that the court's instructions as a whole properly guided the jury's consideration of the evidence because CALJIC No. 8.20 "adequately expressed the need for joint operation of act and intent on that theory"
  3. People v. Williams

    49 Cal.4th 405 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 803 times
    In Williams, supra, 49 Cal.4th 405, 111 Cal.Rptr.3d 589, 233 P.3d 1000, we specifically addressed the question whether police may seek clarification when a suspect makes an ambiguous or equivocal request for the assistance of counsel at the initial stage of an interrogation, prior to any waiver of Miranda rights, as occurred here.
  4. People v. Mayfield

    14 Cal.4th 668 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 789 times
    In People v. Mayfield (1997) 14 Cal.4th 668, where the defendant wrested a gun from a police officer and shot the officer in the head during a brief altercation, it was held that "a rational trier of fact could conclude from the evidence that before shooting [the officer] defendant had made a cold and calculated decision to take [his] life after weighing considerations for and against."
  5. People v. Reed

    38 Cal.4th 1224 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 529 times
    In People v. Reed (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1224, 45 Cal.Rptr.3d 353, 137 P.3d 184 (Reed), we again said: "A defendant may be convicted of an uncharged crime if, but only if, the uncharged crime is necessarily included in the charged crime.
  6. People v. Birks

    19 Cal.4th 108 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 578 times
    Holding that criminal defendant has no unilateral entitlement to instructions on lesser offenses which are not necessarily included in the charge
  7. People v. Blakeley

    23 Cal.4th 82 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 464 times
    Killing with conscious disregard for life and the knowledge that the conduct is life-endangering
  8. People v. Alvarez

    27 Cal.4th 1161 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 309 times
    Holding that California's corpus delicti rule does not restrict the admissibility of incriminatory extrajudicial statements by the accused
  9. People v. Martinez

    11 Cal.4th 434 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 363 times
    Holding that a lewd or lascivious action under § 288 can occur through a victim's clothing
  10. People v. Pinholster

    1 Cal.4th 865 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 377 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In People v. Pinholster (1992) 1 Cal.4th 865, 916-918 [ 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 765, 824 P.2d 571] (Pinholster), we approved the prosecutor's inquiry into the prospective jurors' views on imposing the death penalty in a felony-murder case.
  11. Rule 8.1105 - Publication of appellate opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1105   Cited 1,512 times

    (a)Supreme Court All opinions of the Supreme Court are published in the Official Reports. (b)Courts of Appeal and appellate divisions Except as provided in (e), an opinion of a Court of Appeal or a superior court appellate division is published in the Official Reports if a majority of the rendering court certifies the opinion for publication before the decision is final in that court. (Subd (b) amended effective July 23, 2008; adopted effective April 1, 2007.) (c)Standards for certification An opinion

  12. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 219 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer