37 Cited authorities

Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966) Cited 60,240 times 64 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment
Chapman v. California
386 U.S. 18 (1967) Cited 23,461 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
People v. Falsetta
21 Cal.4th 903 (Cal. 1999) Cited 1,856 times
Holding that although admission of such evidence "represents a deviation from the historical practice of excluding such 'propensity' evidence, the provision preserves trial court discretion to exclude the evidence if its prejudicial effect outweighs its probative value."
People v. Ewoldt
7 Cal.4th 380 (Cal. 1994) Cited 2,251 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "least degree of similarity" between two offenses is required to prove intent.
People v. Watson
46 Cal.2d 818 (Cal. 1956) Cited 13,674 times
Holding that certain trial errors are harmless unless there is a reasonable probability that a different result would have occurred absent the error
People v. Williams
49 Cal.4th 405 (Cal. 2010) Cited 1,040 times
Holding that "the suggestions made by the interrogating officers that defendant may not have been the actual killer, or may not have intended that the victim die" were a permissible interrogation tactic
People v. Abilez
41 Cal.4th 472 (Cal. 2007) Cited 1,084 times
Holding it was proper for prosecutor to ask prospective jurors whether they had developed any principled reservation about voting for death after filling out their questionnaires and undergoing voir dire
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania
403 U.S. 528 (1971) Cited 980 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that juvenile court need not provide jury trial
People v. Lewis
26 Cal.4th 334 (Cal. 2001) Cited 1,149 times
Finding schizophrenic 13-year-old minor understood and waived his Miranda rights
People v. Gutierrez
45 Cal.4th 789 (Cal. 2009) Cited 736 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a voluntary manslaughter instruction is not warranted where the act that allegedly provoked the killing was no more than taunting words, a technical battery, or slight touching."

PEOPLE v. COTTONE

37 Cited authorities

Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment

Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

Holding that although admission of such evidence "represents a deviation from the historical practice of excluding such 'propensity' evidence, the provision preserves trial court discretion to exclude the evidence if its prejudicial effect outweighs its probative value."

Holding that the "least degree of similarity" between two offenses is required to prove intent.

Holding that certain trial errors are harmless unless there is a reasonable probability that a different result would have occurred absent the error

Holding that "the suggestions made by the interrogating officers that defendant may not have been the actual killer, or may not have intended that the victim die" were a permissible interrogation tactic

Holding it was proper for prosecutor to ask prospective jurors whether they had developed any principled reservation about voting for death after filling out their questionnaires and undergoing voir dire

Holding that juvenile court need not provide jury trial

Finding schizophrenic 13-year-old minor understood and waived his Miranda rights

Holding that "a voluntary manslaughter instruction is not warranted where the act that allegedly provoked the killing was no more than taunting words, a technical battery, or slight touching."