§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. RUIZ

Appellant’s Petition for Review

31 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,768 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  2. In re Sheena K

    40 Cal.4th 875 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 2,725 times
    Finding probationer's forfeiture properly disregarded where facially vague and overbroad probation condition could be corrected by inserting a knowledge requirement

  3. People v. Mitchell

    26 Cal.4th 181 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 2,470 times
    Noting that a certified abstract of judgment "constitutes the commitment" and serves as "the process and authority for carrying the judgment and sentence into effect"

  4. People v. Ochoa

    19 Cal.4th 353 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 1,595 times
    Holding no entitlement to instruction on involuntary manslaughter based on voluntary intoxication where the defendant approached the victim, told her to be quiet, displayed a knife, took the victim to a secluded area and told her to remove her pants, and when she later asked to put her pants back on he gave permission.

  5. People v. Hester

    22 Cal.4th 290 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,017 times
    Holding acceptance of plea bargain for specified sentence waived statutory right not to receive multiple punishments for a single act or indivisible course of conduct

  6. People v. Alford

    42 Cal.4th 749 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 648 times
    Holding that the fee under former §1465.8 was not a punitive fine subject to ex post facto restrictions, and that the trial court properly imposed the fee in effect after the defendant committed his crime

  7. People v. High

    119 Cal.App.4th 1192 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 561 times
    In High, supra, 119 Cal.App.4th 1192, we stated: “Although we recognize that a detailed recitation of all the fees, fines and penalties on the record may be tedious, California law does not authorize shortcuts.

  8. People v. Delgado

    43 Cal.4th 1059 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 451 times
    Finding reference to “ ‘PC’ ” “ ‘245’ ” and “ ‘Asslt w DWpn’ ” sufficient to prove assault was committed with deadly weapon to qualify as serious felony

  9. People v. Dotson

    16 Cal.4th 547 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 394 times
    Holding on appeal that sentence enhancements must be imposed even though the People had not asked the trial court to impose them below

  10. People v. Sharret

    191 Cal.App.4th 859 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 263 times
    Finding a separate fee must be imposed for each qualifying violation

  11. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 73,839 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

  13. Rule 8.504 - Form and contents of petition, answer, and reply

    Cal. R. 8.504   Cited 21 times

    (a)In general Except as provided in this rule, a petition for review, answer, and reply must comply with the relevant provisions of rule 8.204. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Contents of a petition (1) The body of the petition must begin with a concise, nonargumentative statement of the issues presented for review, framing them in terms of the facts of the case but without unnecessary detail. (2) The petition must explain how the case presents a ground for review under rule 8.500(b)