§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. WHITE

Respondent’s Petition for Review

54 Cited authorities

  1. 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"

  2. People v. Bolin

    18 Cal.4th 297 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 3,658 times
    Holding that defendant's act of retrieving gun after arguing with victim supported finding that murder was premeditated

  3. People v. Maury

    30 Cal.4th 342 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 2,549 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant must renew a motion for a change of venue after voir dire to preserve the issue for appeal

  4. Blockburger v. United States

    284 U.S. 299 (1932)   Cited 9,736 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the test for whether two offenses are distinct for double jeopardy purposes is "whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not"

  5. People v. Ochoa

    6 Cal.4th 1199 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 2,792 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding evidence of prior convictions for driving under influence, probation and alcohol abuse classes admissible to show gross negligence because it demonstrates defendant's subjective awareness of risks of driving under influence

  6. People v. Stanley

    10 Cal.4th 764 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 2,194 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding admission of evidence of a car arson as an offense that "involved an implied threat of violence against a person"

  7. 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

  8. People v. Smith

    37 Cal.4th 733 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 1,274 times
    Holding that even in the absence of motive, shooting at close range supports inference of express malice

  9. People v. Mendoza

    24 Cal.4th 130 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,178 times
    Finding no cross-admissibility but affirming trial court's denial of defendant's severance motion

  10. 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

  11. Rule 2.251 - Electronic service

    Cal. R. 2.251   Cited 15 times

    (a)Authorization for electronic service When a document may be served by mail, express mail, overnight delivery, or fax transmission, the document may be served electronically under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, Penal Code section 690.5, and the rules in this chapter. For purposes of electronic service made pursuant to Penal Code section 690.5, express consent to electronic service is required.[]= (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2022; previously amended effective January 1, 2007