§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. ELIZALDE

Appellant, Gamaliel Elizalde, Petition for Review

103 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,573 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  2. Jackson v. Virginia

    443 U.S. 307 (1979)   Cited 77,556 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts conducting review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction should view the "evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution"

  3. Estelle v. McGuire

    502 U.S. 62 (1991)   Cited 19,946 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions

  4. Miranda v. Arizona

    384 U.S. 436 (1966)   Cited 60,228 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

  5. Batson v. Kentucky

    476 U.S. 79 (1986)   Cited 15,229 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes

  6. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 23,457 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

  7. Rhode Island v. Innis

    446 U.S. 291 (1980)   Cited 6,125 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a police officer's subjective intent to obtain incriminatory statements is not relevant to determining whether an interrogation has occurred

  8. Bruton v. United States

    391 U.S. 123 (1968)   Cited 8,921 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause is violated when the court admits an incriminating out-of-court statement by a nontestifying codefendant

  9. Crane v. Kentucky

    476 U.S. 683 (1986)   Cited 3,275 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an opportunity to present a complete defense "would be an empty one if the State were permitted to exclude competent, reliable evidence bearing on the credibility of a confession when such evidence is central to the defendant's claim of innocence"

  10. Johnson v. California

    545 U.S. 162 (2005)   Cited 1,391 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258, 148 Cal.Rptr. 890, 583 P.2d 748 and Batson standards are different, and that the less demanding Batson standard controls

  11. Rule 8.1110 - Partial publication

    Cal. R. 8.1110   Cited 2,324 times

    (a)Order for partial publication A majority of the rendering court may certify for publication any part of an opinion meeting a standard for publication under rule 8.1105. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Opinion contents The published part of the opinion must specify the part or parts not certified for publication. All material, factual and legal, including the disposition, that aids in the application or interpretation of the published part must be published. (c) Construction For

  12. Rule 8.1105 - Publication of appellate opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1105   Cited 2,085 times

    (a)Supreme Court All opinions of the Supreme Court are published in the Official Reports. (b)Courts of Appeal and appellate divisions Except as provided in (e), an opinion of a Court of Appeal or a superior court appellate division is published in the Official Reports if a majority of the rendering court certifies the opinion for publication before the decision is final in that court. (Subd (b) amended effective July 23, 2008; adopted effective April 1, 2007.) (c)Standards for certification An opinion

  13. Rule 8.200 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae

    Cal. R. 8.200   Cited 712 times

    (a)Parties' briefs (1) Each appellant must serve and file an appellant's opening brief. (2) Each respondent must serve and file a respondent's brief. (3) Each appellant may serve and file a reply brief. (4) No other brief may be filed except with the permission of the presiding justice, unless it qualifies under (b) or (c)(7). (5) Instead of filing a brief, or as part of its brief, a party may join in or adopt by reference all or part of a brief in the same or a related appeal. (Subd (a) amended

  14. Rule 8.504 - Form and contents of petition, answer, and reply

    Cal. R. 8.504   Cited 21 times

    (a)In general Except as provided in this rule, a petition for review, answer, and reply must comply with the relevant provisions of rule 8.204. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Contents of a petition (1) The body of the petition must begin with a concise, nonargumentative statement of the issues presented for review, framing them in terms of the facts of the case but without unnecessary detail. (2) The petition must explain how the case presents a ground for review under rule 8.500(b)