37 Cited authorities

  1. Crawford v. Washington

    541 U.S. 36 (2004)   Cited 14,649 times   81 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"
  2. Melendez–Diaz v. Massachusetts

    557 U.S. 305 (2009)   Cited 2,978 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a certification that material seized by the police included cocaine was testimonial
  3. Morrissey v. Brewer

    408 U.S. 471 (1972)   Cited 9,547 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the minimum requirements of due process" in a parole revocation proceeding include "the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses"
  4. Gagnon v. Scarpelli

    411 U.S. 778 (1973)   Cited 4,627 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that probation revocation is not a stage of criminal prosecution
  5. Black v. Romano

    471 U.S. 606 (1985)   Cited 560 times
    Holding that basic requirements include a hearing, a neutral hearing body, written notice of claimed violations, disclosure of evidence, an opportunity to testify, an opportunity to confront witnesses and, in some cases, the assistance of counsel
  6. Doe v. City of Los Angeles

    42 Cal.4th 531 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 194 times
    Holding courts construing California statutes "may not broaden or narrow the scope of the provision by reading into it language that does not appear in it or reading out of it language that does."
  7. Elsner v. Uveges

    34 Cal.4th 915 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 209 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Applying McKown to a claim involving unsafe scaffolding
  8. People v. Feyrer

    48 Cal.4th 426 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 173 times
    Discussing a court's discretion under Cal.Penal Code § 17(b)
  9. People v. Galvan

    155 Cal.App.4th 978 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 185 times
    In People v. Galvan, supra, 155 Cal.App.4th 978, the appellate court held that the defendant's failure to report to probation within 24 hours of his release from custody was not willful where it was caused by his immediate deportation by the federal government.
  10. People v. Trujillo

    40 Cal.4th 165 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 158 times
    In People v. Trujillo (2006) 40 Cal.4th 165, 51 Cal. Rptr.3d 718, 146 P.3d 1259 (Trujillo), the high court determined a defendant's postplea admission to a probation officer regarding a prior criminal action is not part of that action's "record of conviction," and the statement cannot be admitted to establish the prior conviction qualified as a strike. [Citation.] Trujillo overruled Monreal and another Court of Appeal decision that upheld using admissions in probation reports to prove a strike, People v. Mobley (4 th Dist., Div.1, 1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 761, 796, 85 Cal. Rptr.2d 474.
  11. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 229 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