Citation network
Hedgpeth Vs. Pulido
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 02, 2008
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Per Curiam Hedgpeth V. PulidoSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 07-544 Anthony Hedgpeth, Warden, Petitioner V. MichaelSearch
-
if the jury was instructed on alternative theories of guilt and may have relied on an invalid one. See Stromberg v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
under California law, but upheld the conviction on the ground that Pulido was not prejudiced by the error. People v. PulidoSearch
-
Pulido v. LamarqueSearch
-
quoting Brecht , supra , at 637). The State appealed and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Pulido v. ChronesSearch
-
that the defendant was convicted under a proper theory. Id. , at 676 (citing Lara v. RyanSearch
-
The Ninth Circuit precedent on which the Court of Appeals relied, see Lara v. RyanSearch
-
Id. , at 368. In Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
is otherwise legally flawed. Both Stromberg and Yates were decided before we concluded in Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
error are not structural but instead trial errors subject to harmless-error review. See, e.g. , Neder v. UnitedSearch
-
California v. RoySearch
-
U. S., at 11 (quoting Sullivan v. LouisianaSearch
-
Scannlain, J., concurring specially) (quoting Quigley v. VoseSearch
-
see also Becht v. UnitedSearch
-
the instructional error was structural. Under such circumstances, remand is the appropriate course. Hedgpeth v. PulidoSearch
-
Stevens, J., Dissenting Hedgpeth V. PulidoSearch
-
s, which correctly applied the standards set forth in Kotteakos v. UnitedSearch
-
States , 328 U. S. 750 (1946), Brecht v. AbrahamsonSearch
-
Neal v. McAninchSearch
-
of a felony at the time of a killing when one of the joint actors kills in furtherance of the common design. People v. PulidoSearch
-
and before the Court of Appeals issued its decision in this case, a different panel of the Ninth Circuit decided Lara v. RyanSearch
-
we have done so because the error defies analysis by harmless-error standards. See Arizona v. FulminanteSearch
-
see also United States v. Gonzalez-LopezSearch
-
U. S. 140 , 150 (2006) (quoting Sullivan v. LouisianaSearch
-
Pulido v. ChronesSearch
-
Unlike the District Court, Judge Thomas applied the harmless-error standard announced in Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
s state petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See Pulido v. ChronesSearch
-
opinion asserts that Pulido argued that the error was structural under Lara v. RyanSearch
-
arguments had initially focused on the proper application of Brecht v. AbrahamsonSearch
-
Anthony Hedgpeth, Warden, Petitioner V. MichaelSearch
-
See Stromberg v. CaliforniaSearch
-
People v. PulidoSearch
-
Lara v. RyanSearch
-
In Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
Neder v. UnitedSearch
-
Sullivan v. LouisianaSearch
-
Quigley v. VoseSearch
-
Becht v. UnitedSearch
-
Kotteakos v. UnitedSearch
-
See Arizona v. FulminanteSearch
-
See Pulido v. ChronesSearch
-
of Brecht v. AbrahamsonSearch
-
Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial