31 Cited authorities

  1. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 21,901 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt”
  2. Crawford v. Washington

    541 U.S. 36 (2004)   Cited 14,477 times   81 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an absent witness's statements are admissible under the Confrontation Clause "only where the declarant is unavailable, and only where the defendant [] had a prior opportunity to cross-examine"
  3. Descamps v. United States

    570 U.S. 254 (2013)   Cited 4,225 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "may look only to the statutory definitions—i.e ., the elements—of a defendant’s prior offenses"
  4. Shepard v. U.S.

    544 U.S. 13 (2005)   Cited 3,741 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when a guilty plea leads to a conviction for violating a statute with alternative elements, courts look to certain documents in the record to determine whether that conviction qualifies as an ACCA predicate
  5. Ohio v. Roberts

    448 U.S. 56 (1980)   Cited 4,289 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the question of good-faith effort is a question of reasonableness, and a prosecutor is not required to do a futile act
  6. Giles v. California

    554 U.S. 353 (2008)   Cited 625 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prior testimony is admissible if the witness is unavailable and the defense had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness on this prior testimony
  7. People v. Brown

    31 Cal.4th 518 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 757 times
    In People v. Brown, supra, 31 Cal.4th 518, we stated that the trial court properly refused to give "the following instruction: `An individual under 18 is not subject to the death penalty.
  8. Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court

    57 Cal.2d 450 (Cal. 1962)   Cited 3,374 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California trial court is bound by decisions of state supreme court and courts of appeal
  9. People v. Zapien

    4 Cal.4th 929 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 850 times
    Upholding multiple hearsay evidence as proof of statement that witness denied having made
  10. People v. Friend

    47 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 435 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Friend, the court stated that in describing the defendant as a "sociopath" the prosecutor was not improperly stating an expert opinion but rather was "using language in common currency to describe his interpretation of the evidence.
  11. Section 924 - Penalties

    18 U.S.C. § 924   Cited 45,801 times   170 Legal Analyses
    Holding that conviction for eluding police, under Maine statute which provides that "[w]hoever, after being requested or signaled to stop, attempts to elude a law enforcement officer by driving a vehicle at a reckless rate of speed which results in a high-speed chase between the operator's vehicle and any law enforcement vehicle using a blue light and siren is guilty" of a felony-level crime, involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)
  12. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 5,829 times

    (a) Unpublished opinion Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action. (b)Exceptions An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on: (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or (2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary

  13. Rule 8.204 - Contents and format of briefs

    Cal. R. 8.204   Cited 2,659 times

    (a) Contents (1) Each brief must: (A) Begin with a table of contents and a table of authorities separately listing cases, constitutions, statutes, court rules, and other authorities cited; (B) State each point under a separate heading or subheading summarizing the point, and support each point by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority; and (C) Support any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears. If any part

  14. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 222 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