§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. SOTO

Amicus Curiae Brief of Ray Haynes

150 Cited authorities

  1. Montana v. Egelhoff

    518 U.S. 37 (1996)   Cited 1,315 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the exclusion of even relevant evidence does not violate due process unless it implicates a "fundamental principle of justice"

  2. People v. Rangel

    62 Cal.4th 1192 (Cal. 2016)   Cited 905 times
    Holding that Hurst did not render unconstitutional California's capital sentencing scheme, which utilizes a jury in the fact-finding process

  3. People v. Catlin

    26 Cal.4th 81 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 1,401 times
    Ruling the legislative preference for a single jury was not inherently unfair, even in a prior-murder special-circumstance capital case

  4. People v. Chun

    45 Cal.4th 1172 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 1,032 times
    Holding that Cal. Penal Code § 246 cannot be a predicate offense to support second-degree felony-murder conviction

  5. People v. Steele

    27 Cal.4th 1230 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 1,127 times
    Holding that in order to find provocation or heat of passion, jury must find circumstances that would arouse passions of reasonable person, not necessarily of defendant

  6. State v. Moody

    208 Ariz. 424 (Ariz. 2004)   Cited 739 times
    Holding defendant was not entitled to voluntary act instruction where no expert testimony "suggested that [his] actions were not performed consciously and as a result of effort and determination;" his brain impairments "do not inform the actus reus determination"

  7. People v. Seaton

    26 Cal.4th 598 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 708 times
    Holding that when defense counsel failed to object to testimony and "the record does not reveal why counsel did not object, [an ineffective assistance of counsel] claim rests on facts outside of the record, and may only be raised on habeas corpus"

  8. People v. Knoller

    41 Cal.4th 139 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 579 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Approving language that implied malice requires an act "deliberately performed"

  9. People v. Lasko

    23 Cal.4th 101 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 681 times
    Holding that CALJIC No. 8.40 (6th ed.) was improper “because intent to kill is not a necessary element of voluntary manslaughter”

  10. Powell v. Texas

    392 U.S. 514 (1968)   Cited 544 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding constitutional a criminal statute against public drunkenness

  11. Section 2903.02 - Murder

    Ohio Rev. Code § 2903.02   Cited 3,651 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Defining murder as "purposely" causing death

  12. Section 2502 - Murder

    18 Pa. C.S. § 2502   Cited 2,570 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Relating to murder

  13. Section 13A-6-2 - Murder

    Ala. Code § 13A-6-2   Cited 884 times
    Defining murder as an intending and causing "the death of another person"

  14. Section 2901.21 - Criminal liability, culpability

    Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.21   Cited 705 times
    Stating when an offense is a strict-liability offense

  15. Section 22 - [Renumbered]

    Cal. Pen. Code § 22   Cited 466 times
    Explaining that evidence of voluntary intoxication as an excuse for a crime "is admissible solely on the issue whether or not the defendant actually formed a required specific intent"

  16. Section 8.04 - Intoxication

    Tex. Pen. Code § 8.04   Cited 300 times
    Providing that "[v]oluntary intoxication does not constitute a defense to the commission of crime"

  17. Section 776.012 - Use or threatened use of force in defense of person

    Fla. Stat. § 776.012   Cited 275 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a person's use of deadly force is justified if that person reasonably believes his deliberate action is "necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself"

  18. Section 201 - Murder

    Me. Stat. tit. 17-A § 201   Cited 134 times
    Repealing and replacing sentencing statutes

  19. Section 704.3 - Defense of self or another

    Iowa Code § 704.3   Cited 102 times
    Defining when a person is justified in using reasonable force to defend oneself

  20. Section 13A-3-23 - Use of force in defense of a person

    Ala. Code § 13A-3-23   Cited 99 times
    Authorizing force against what a person "reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person"

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

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,189 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