§Why CasetextPricing

PEOPLE v. PEREZ

Respondent’s Opening Brief on the Merits

49 Cited authorities

  1. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 26,692 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. Alleyne v. United States

    570 U.S. 99 (2013)   Cited 8,140 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding such finding necessary to trigger higher mandatory minimum

  3. Dillon v. United States

    560 U.S. 817 (2010)   Cited 7,224 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding the Sentencing Commission's policy statements are binding on a court considering a motion for sentencing reduction under § 3582(c)

  4. Descamps v. United States

    570 U.S. 254 (2013)   Cited 4,974 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "may look only to the statutory definitions—i.e ., the elements—of a defendant’s prior offenses"

  5. Harris v. United States

    536 U.S. 545 (2002)   Cited 1,565 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "discharging [i]s sentencing factor[] to be found by the judge, not [an] offense element[]"

  6. People v. Williams

    26 Cal.4th 779 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 692 times
    Holding that assault does not require a specific intent to cause injury or a subjective awareness of the risk that an injury might occur

  7. People v. Osuna

    225 Cal.App.4th 1020 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 440 times
    Holding the correct standard of proof for resentencing eligibility determinations is preponderance of the evidence

  8. People v. Superior Court (Kaulick)

    215 Cal.App.4th 1279 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 445 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding People have due process right to notice and opportunity to be heard on issue of danger to public at such hearing

  9. People v. Aguilar

    16 Cal.4th 1023 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 700 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a deadly weapon must be an object extrinsic to the human body

  10. People v. Delgado

    43 Cal.4th 1059 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 453 times
    Finding reference to “ ‘PC’ ” “ ‘245’ ” and “ ‘Asslt w DWpn’ ” sufficient to prove assault was committed with deadly weapon to qualify as serious felony

  11. Section 924 - Penalties

    18 U.S.C. § 924   Cited 66,099 times   187 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. Section 3582 - Imposition of a sentence of imprisonment

    18 U.S.C. § 3582   Cited 55,170 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Granting district court discretion to modify sentence when Sentencing Guideline upon which sentence was based is subsequently amended

  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)