28 Cited authorities

Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project
561 U.S. 1 (2010) Cited 854 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiffs had standing because a statute criminalized knowingly providing material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization, and the plaintiffs had provided support to groups designated as terrorist organizations and planned to provide similar support in the future
Salinas v. United States
522 U.S. 52 (1997) Cited 1,207 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that the canon of construction requiring a clear statement to alter the federal-state balance of criminal jurisdiction "does not warrant a departure from terms" where the statute's "text . . . is unambiguous on the point under consideration"
People v. Albillar
51 Cal.4th 47 (Cal. 2010) Cited 1,665 times
Holding that "if substantial evidence establishes that the defendant intended to and did commit the charged felony with known members of a gang, the jury may fairly infer that the defendant had the specific intent to promote, further, or assist criminal conduct by those gang members"
Iannelli v. United States
420 U.S. 770 (1975) Cited 1,201 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the conspiratorial agreement may be proved by circumstantial evidence, including the acts and conduct of the coconspirators and the inferences that may be drawn from their acts
People v. Rodriguez
55 Cal.4th 1125 (Cal. 2012) Cited 518 times
Discussing CPC § 186.22
People v. Homick
55 Cal.4th 816 (Cal. 2012) Cited 495 times
Stating that the element of agreeing to commit a crime "must often be proved circumstantially"
People v. Mesa
54 Cal.4th 191 (Cal. 2012) Cited 351 times
Rejecting argument "that multiple punishment is permitted under section 654 because the shootings harmed both the individual victims and the entire community," pursuant to rule that "section 654 does not apply to crimes of violence against multiple victims"
People v. Castenada
23 Cal.4th 743 (Cal. 2000) Cited 440 times
Finding that legislature's wording of "actively participates," as contained in Cal. Penal Code § 186.22, is not void for vagueness
People v. Swain
12 Cal.4th 593 (Cal. 1996) Cited 451 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding conspiracy to commit murder under the theory of implied malice is legally impossible, as implied malice cannot “coexist with a specific intent to kill”
Scales v. United States
367 U.S. 203 (1961) Cited 392 times
Holding that a statute criminalizing membership in an organization offends due process if it "impermissibly imputes guilt to an individual merely on the basis of his associations and sympathies, rather than because of some concrete personal involvement in criminal conduct"
Section 1962 - Prohibited activities
18 U.S.C. § 1962 Cited 15,844 times 59 Legal Analyses
Specifying prohibited activities

PEOPLE v. JOHNSON

28 Cited authorities

Holding that the plaintiffs had standing because a statute criminalized knowingly providing material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization, and the plaintiffs had provided support to groups designated as terrorist organizations and planned to provide similar support in the future

Holding that the canon of construction requiring a clear statement to alter the federal-state balance of criminal jurisdiction "does not warrant a departure from terms" where the statute's "text . . . is unambiguous on the point under consideration"

Holding that "if substantial evidence establishes that the defendant intended to and did commit the charged felony with known members of a gang, the jury may fairly infer that the defendant had the specific intent to promote, further, or assist criminal conduct by those gang members"

Holding that the conspiratorial agreement may be proved by circumstantial evidence, including the acts and conduct of the coconspirators and the inferences that may be drawn from their acts

Discussing CPC § 186.22

Stating that the element of agreeing to commit a crime "must often be proved circumstantially"

Rejecting argument "that multiple punishment is permitted under section 654 because the shootings harmed both the individual victims and the entire community," pursuant to rule that "section 654 does not apply to crimes of violence against multiple victims"

Finding that legislature's wording of "actively participates," as contained in Cal. Penal Code § 186.22, is not void for vagueness

Holding conspiracy to commit murder under the theory of implied malice is legally impossible, as implied malice cannot “coexist with a specific intent to kill”

Holding that a statute criminalizing membership in an organization offends due process if it "impermissibly imputes guilt to an individual merely on the basis of his associations and sympathies, rather than because of some concrete personal involvement in criminal conduct"

Specifying prohibited activities