§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. FARWELL

Appellant’s Supplemental Brief

6 Cited authorities

  1. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 23,453 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

  2. Boykin v. Alabama

    395 U.S. 238 (1969)   Cited 13,215 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a silent record is insufficient for a waiver of certain specified rights not at issue here

  3. In re Tahl

    1 Cal.3d 122 (Cal. 1969)   Cited 1,573 times
    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."

  4. In re Resendiz

    25 Cal.4th 230 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 427 times
    Holding "that affirmative misadvice regarding immigration consequences can in certain circumstances constitute ineffective assistance of counsel"

  5. Johnson v. Acevedo

    572 F.3d 398 (7th Cir. 2009)   Cited 60 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the federal court must ask whether the state court applied federal law unreasonably when finding that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt

  6. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Allen

    801 F.2d 863 (6th Cir. 1986)   Cited 2 times

    No. 85-5822. Argued July 29, 1986. Decided September 25, 1986. Alan L. Spear (argued), Sally C. Bradley, Knoxville, Tenn., Michael L. Powell, for plaintiff-appellant. Gary L. Goldstein, Johnson City, Tenn., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Before MERRITT and GUY, Circuit Judges, and BALLANTINE, District Judge. The Honorable Thomas A. Ballantine, Jr., Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky