Chapman v. California

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

Sullivan v. Louisiana

Holding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "

Hollingsworth v. Perry

Holding that proponents of a ballot initiative who "ha[d] no role ... in the enforcement of " the initiative and were not "agents of the State" lacked standing to defend it on appeal

Duncan v. Louisiana

Holding that trial by jury is a fundamental right

Dusky v. United States

Holding that the standard for competence to stand trial is whether the defendant has "sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding" and has "a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him."

People v. Watson

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. Flood

Concluding that harmless error analysis rather than automatic reversal is required where jury instruction removed an element from jury consideration because, among other things, the element was established by "overwhelming and uncontradicted evidence"

People v. Howard

Holding that the defendant failed to show systematic exclusion to establish a prima facie violation of the fair cross-section requirement under Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357, 358–367, 99 S.Ct. 664, 58 L.Ed.2d 579

People v. Mosby

Holding that totality of the circumstances showed defendant's prior conviction admission was voluntarily and intelligently despite absence of full advisements where, among other things, defendant previously had pleaded guilty

In re Tahl

In People v. Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122 (Tahl), the California Supreme Court interpreted Boykin v. Alabama as requiring that "each of the three rights mentioned-self-incrimination, confrontation, and jury trial-must be specifically and expressly enumerated for the benefit of and waived by the accused prior to acceptance of his guilty plea."

Section 664 - Punishment for attempt to commit crime

Requiring intent to kill for attempted murder

Section 1368 - Doubt about mental competence of defendant during pendency of action

Requiring a court to appoint an attorney for a defendant in a criminal case if a doubt arises in the mind of the judge as to the defendant's mental competence

Section 1026.5 - Maximum term of commitment

Providing “maximum term of commitment” to state hospital for defendant who has been found guilty by reason of insanity is “the longest term of imprisonment which could have been imposed for the offense or offenses of which the person was convicted”

Section 2972 - Hearing on petition for continued treatment

Declaring “affirmative obligation on the treatment facility to provide treatment”

Section 2970 - Written evaluation; petition for continued involuntary treatment

Requiring a letter 180 days prior to the termination of parole or good cause for reduction of the 180-day period

Section 2966 - Hearing

Providing that "trial shall be by jury unless waived by both the person and the district attorney"

Section 631 - Unlawful tapping

Prohibiting "any person who . . . makes any unauthorized connection . . . or who willfully and without the consent of all parties to the communication . . . reads, or attempts to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message is in transit or passing over any wire, line, or cable . . . "

Section 16 - Crimes and public offenses

Noting that a houseboat cabin is a building for the purpose of a burglary statute

Section 988 - Arraignment

Section 372 - Maintaining or committing public nuisance

Relating to failure to remove a public nuisance