§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. DELEON

Amicus Curiae Brief of District Attorney of Los Angeles County

17 Cited authorities

  1. Mathews v. Eldridge

    424 U.S. 319 (1976)   Cited 15,717 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a procedure based on written submissions was adequate because it included safeguards against mistake including that the agency informed the recipient of its tentative assessment and the evidence supporting it and an opportunity was then afforded the recipient to submit additional evidence "enabling him to challenge directly the accuracy of information in his file as well as the correctness of the agency's tentative conclusions"

  2. Morrissey v. Brewer

    408 U.S. 471 (1972)   Cited 10,673 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that parolees "must have an opportunity to be heard and to show . . . that circumstances in mitigation suggest that the violation does not warrant revocation"

  3. Gagnon v. Scarpelli

    411 U.S. 778 (1973)   Cited 5,194 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that probation revocation is not a stage of criminal prosecution

  4. Kelly v. State

    436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)   Cited 3,333 times
    Holding that "appointed [appellate] counsel has a duty, once he has filed a motion to withdraw from representation with accompanying Anders brief, to assist the appellant in filing a motion in the court of appeals for access to the appellate record if that is indeed what the appellant wants

  5. Cafeteria Workers v. McElroy

    367 U.S. 886 (1961)   Cited 1,779 times
    Holding that where plaintiff "remained entirely free to obtain employment" either with her employer or another employer, her liberty right in "follow[ing] a chosen trade or profession" was not implicated

  6. Black v. Romano

    471 U.S. 606 (1985)   Cited 642 times
    Holding that a probationer is generally not entitled to "the full panoply of procedural safeguards associated with a criminal trial"

  7. People v. Arreola

    7 Cal.4th 1144 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 233 times
    Concluding that the due process violation therein was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt

  8. People v. Vickers

    8 Cal.3d 451 (Cal. 1972)   Cited 413 times
    Holding that under the federal and state constitutions, the minimum requirements of due process for revocation of probation include written notice of the claimed violations of probation; disclosure of the evidence of the alleged violations; an opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documentary evidence; the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses; and a written statement of the reasons for revoking probation

  9. Williams v. Superior Court (People)

    230 Cal.App.4th 636 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 118 times
    In Williams v. Superior Court (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 636 (Williams), the court applied the Morrissey and Vickers safeguards to the post-realignment statutory framework for parole revocation.

  10. People v. Coleman

    13 Cal.3d 867 (Cal. 1975)   Cited 277 times
    Holding prosecution could use revocation hearing testimony to impeach or rebut clearly inconsistent testimony at later trial

  11. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,146 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or