59 Cited authorities

Jackson v. Virginia
443 U.S. 307 (1979) Cited 77,575 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"
Neder v. United States
527 U.S. 1 (1999) Cited 4,937 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless
Chapman v. California
386 U.S. 18 (1967) Cited 23,463 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
Boykin v. Alabama
395 U.S. 238 (1969) Cited 13,222 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that a silent record is insufficient for a waiver of certain specified rights not at issue here
Florida v. Harris
568 U.S. 237 (2013) Cited 1,190 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in the Fourth Amendment context, an officer "has probable cause to conduct a search when the facts available to [him] would warrant a [person] of reasonable caution in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime is present"
People v. Doolin
45 Cal.4th 390 (Cal. 2009) Cited 3,864 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding defendant's request to represent himself was untimely where he sought self-representation at sentencing hearing only after his Marsden motion was denied
Washington v. Texas
388 U.S. 14 (1967) Cited 3,342 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute that categorically barred accomplices from testifying for a defendant on trial for the same crime "cannot ... be defended"
People v. Young
34 Cal.4th 1149 (Cal. 2005) Cited 2,832 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the claim that post-conviction counsel was "burdened by a conflict of interest" was not cognizable because there is no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in post-conviction proceedings
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
People v. Scott
9 Cal.4th 331 (Cal. 1994) Cited 3,898 times
Holding that "complaints about the manner in which the trial court exercises its sentencing discretion and articulates its supporting reasons cannot be raised for the first time on appeal"
Rule 8.1100 - Authority
Cal. R. 8.1100 Cited 417 times
The rules governing the publication of appellate opinions are adopted by the Supreme Court under section 14 of article VI of the California Constitution and published in the California Rules of Court at the direction of the Judicial Council. Cal. R. Ct. 8.1100 Rule 8.1100 adopted effective 1/1/2007.
Rule 8.500 - Petition for review
Cal. R. 8.500 Cited 337 times
(a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer
Rule 8.320 - Normal record; exhibits
Cal. R. 8.320 Cited 132 times
(a) Contents If the defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction, or if the People appeal from an order granting a new trial, the record must contain a clerk's transcript and a reporter's transcript, which together constitute the normal record. (b) Clerk's transcript The clerk's transcript must contain: (1) The accusatory pleading and any amendment; (2) Any demurrer or other plea; (3) All court minutes; (4) All jury instructions that any party submitted in writing and the cover page required by
Rule 8.1 - Title
Cal. R. 8.1 Cited 6 times
The rules in this title may be referred to as the Appellate Rules. All references in this title to "these rules" are to the Appellate Rules. Cal. R. Ct. 8.1 Rule 8.1 adopted effective 1/1/2007.

PEOPLE v. REESE

59 Cited authorities

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"

Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless

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

Holding that a silent record is insufficient for a waiver of certain specified rights not at issue here

Holding that, in the Fourth Amendment context, an officer "has probable cause to conduct a search when the facts available to [him] would warrant a [person] of reasonable caution in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime is present"

Holding defendant's request to represent himself was untimely where he sought self-representation at sentencing hearing only after his Marsden motion was denied

Holding that a statute that categorically barred accomplices from testifying for a defendant on trial for the same crime "cannot ... be defended"

Holding that the claim that post-conviction counsel was "burdened by a conflict of interest" was not cognizable because there is no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in post-conviction proceedings

Holding that defendant's act of retrieving gun after arguing with victim supported finding that murder was premeditated

Holding that "complaints about the manner in which the trial court exercises its sentencing discretion and articulates its supporting reasons cannot be raised for the first time on appeal"