37 Cited authorities

Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966) Cited 60,230 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
People v. Chun
45 Cal.4th 1172 (Cal. 2009) Cited 1,027 times
Holding that Cal. Penal Code § 246 cannot be a predicate offense to support second-degree felony-murder conviction
People v. Reed
38 Cal.4th 1224 (Cal. 2006) Cited 919 times
Holding that only the elements test, and not the accusative pleading test, is appropriate for determining what qualifies as a lesser included offense
People v. Guiton
4 Cal.4th 1116 (Cal. 1993) Cited 1,037 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding different standards of review apply depending on whether a theory of guilt is legally or factually insufficient
People v. Green
27 Cal.3d 1 (Cal. 1980) Cited 1,436 times
Holding "if the larcenous purpose does not arise until after the force has been used against the victim," defendant is not guilty of robbery
People v. Guiuan
18 Cal.4th 558 (Cal. 1998) Cited 694 times
Approving this instruction
People v. Martinez
20 Cal.4th 225 (Cal. 1999) Cited 627 times
Holding that retroactive application of the revised kidnapping instruction was barred by the federal Due Process Clause
Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment Housing Com
43 Cal.3d 1379 (Cal. 1987) Cited 888 times
Holding that the statute did not extend to cover remedies that were “different in kind from the enumerated remedies,” because “ more reasonable reading of the phrase ‘including, but not limited to,’ ... permitting only additional corrective remedies comports with the statutory construction doctrines of ejusdem generis, expressio unius est exclusio alterius and noscitur a sociis.”
People v. Hall
41 Cal.3d 826 (Cal. 1986) Cited 810 times
Recognizing that third-party culpability evidence is subject to state evidentiary rules and cannot be premised upon inadmissible hearsay
People v. Jennings
53 Cal.3d 334 (Cal. 1991) Cited 680 times
Holding "[n]o reasonable juror would have interpreted these instructions to permit a conviction where the evidence shows that defendant was 'apparently' guilty, yet not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"

PEOPLE v. WHITMER

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 Cal. Penal Code § 246 cannot be a predicate offense to support second-degree felony-murder conviction

Holding that only the elements test, and not the accusative pleading test, is appropriate for determining what qualifies as a lesser included offense

Holding different standards of review apply depending on whether a theory of guilt is legally or factually insufficient

Holding "if the larcenous purpose does not arise until after the force has been used against the victim," defendant is not guilty of robbery

Approving this instruction

Holding that retroactive application of the revised kidnapping instruction was barred by the federal Due Process Clause

Recognizing that third-party culpability evidence is subject to state evidentiary rules and cannot be premised upon inadmissible hearsay

Holding "[n]o reasonable juror would have interpreted these instructions to permit a conviction where the evidence shows that defendant was 'apparently' guilty, yet not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"