21 Cited authorities

  1. Neder v. United States

    527 U.S. 1 (1999)   Cited 4,920 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless
  2. Sullivan v. Louisiana

    508 U.S. 275 (1993)   Cited 3,274 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "
  3. Rose v. Clark

    478 U.S. 570 (1986)   Cited 1,805 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an unconstitutional instruction regarding malice in a murder case was subject to harmless-error analysis
  4. P1eople. v. Hill

    17 Cal.4th 800 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 3,790 times
    Holding the prosecutor committed misconduct insofar as her statement that '"[t]here has to be some evidence on which to base a doubt'" "could reasonably be interpreted as suggesting to the jury she did not have the burden of proving every element of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt"
  5. People v. Cole

    33 Cal.4th 1158 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 2,221 times
    Finding defendant's statements following an attack on his wife to be probative of an intent to torture
  6. People v. Cummings

    4 Cal.4th 1233 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 916 times
    Holding that in a murder trial, the lower court prejudicially admitted into evidence the separate conviction of a codefendant's wife as an accessory to murder and robbery under Evidence Code section 352
  7. People v. Mil

    53 Cal.4th 400 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 336 times
    Adopting prejudice test and rejecting per se reversal for instructions that omit multiple elements of a criminal offense
  8. People v. Aranda

    55 Cal.4th 342 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 261 times
    In Aranda, the court discussed the application of the Chapman standard to assess the effect of the erroneous omission of the standard reasonable doubt instruction.
  9. People v. Travis

    139 Cal.App.4th 1271 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 73 times
    In People v. Travis (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1271, 1293 1295, the court upheld DNA collection and sampling under sections 296 and 296.1 against an ex post facto challenge.
  10. People v. Magee

    107 Cal.App.4th 188 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 51 times
    In Magee, the defendant argued that his conviction for accessory to robbery had to be reversed, because the court did not instruct the jury on each element of robbery.
  11. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 73,817 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

  12. 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