§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. RODAS

Appellant’s Petition for Review

31 Cited authorities

  1. O'Sullivan v. Boerckel

    526 U.S. 838 (1999)   Cited 17,793 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to ensure exhaustion a petitioner must present their claims throughout "one complete round of the State's established appellate review process."

  2. Bruton v. United States

    391 U.S. 123 (1968)   Cited 8,923 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause is violated when the court admits an incriminating out-of-court statement by a nontestifying codefendant

  3. Drope v. Missouri

    420 U.S. 162 (1975)   Cited 2,897 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant's "demeanor at trial" may establish a need for further inquiry into the defendant's competency

  4. Dusky v. United States

    362 U.S. 402 (1960)   Cited 3,976 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the standard for competence to stand trial is whether the defendant has "sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding" and has "a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him."

  5. Pate v. Robinson

    383 U.S. 375 (1966)   Cited 3,025 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trial court must hold a competency hearing when there is evidence before the court that objectively creates a bona fide question as to whether the defendant is competent to stand trial

  6. People v. Young

    34 Cal.4th 1149 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 2,832 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the claim that post-conviction counsel was "burdened by a conflict of interest" was not cognizable because there is no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in post-conviction proceedings

  7. People v. Rogers

    39 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 1,479 times
    Holding as to equal protection and other constitutional claims, "defendant forfeited each of these claims by failing to raise them at trial"

  8. People v. Panah

    35 Cal.4th 395 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 1,247 times
    Finding motion untimely where counsel was aware of facts as early as September but he waited to file until the eve of trial in November

  9. People v. Mai

    57 Cal.4th 986 (Cal. 2013)   Cited 809 times
    Finding the other instructions sufficient

  10. People v. Welch

    20 Cal.4th 701 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 1,277 times
    Holding the trial court "erred in its determination that a higher standard of competence to waive counsel applied"

  11. Section Amendment V - Rights of Persons

    U.S. Const. amend. V   Cited 19,272 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that crimes be prosecuted on a presentment or indictment

  12. Section 15

    Cal. Const. art. I § 15   Cited 3,311 times
    Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”

  13. Section 7

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 2,109 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection

  14. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 73,834 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

  15. 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

  16. 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)