5 California opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2022 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2021As for the prejudice component of the test, “[i]t is not enough for the defendant to show that the errors had some conceivable effect on the outcome of the proceeding.” (Strickland, supra, 466 U.S. at p. 693 .) Rather, “[t]he defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. 2021Consequently, she says she “ha[s] no independent recollection of having a tactical reason for not objecting to the prosecutor’s misstatement of the facts.” As for the prejudice component of the test, “[i]t is not enough for the defendant to show that the errors had some conceivable effect on the outcome of the proceeding.” (Strickland, supra, 466 U.S. at p. 693 .) Rather, “[t]he defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. | 2 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Covarrubias
green
2 sentences2022A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” (Id. at p. 694.) Moreover, “ ‘we “do not lightly infer” that the jury drew the most damaging rather than the least damaging meaning from the prosecutor’s statements.’ ” (People v. Covarrubias (2016) 1 Cal.5th 838, 894 .) “For a prosecutor’s remarks to constitute misconduct, it must appear reasonably likely in the context of the whole argument and instructions that ‘ “the jury understood or applied the complained-of comments in an improper or erroneous manner.” ’ ” (People v. Winbush (2017) 2 Cal.5th 4 2021A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” (Id. at p. 694.) “How readily deficient performance undermines confidence in the trial’s outcome will in part depend on the strength of the trial evidence on any decisive points.” (In re Gay, supra, 8 Cal.5th at p. 1087 .) “For a prosecutor’s remarks to constitute misconduct, it must appear reasonably likely in the context of the whole argument and instructions that ‘“the jury understood or applied the complained-of comments in an improper or erroneous manner.”’ [Citation.]” (People v. Winbush (2017) | 2 | 2021–2022 |
People v. Winbush
green
2 sentences2022A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” (Id. at p. 694.) Moreover, “ ‘we “do not lightly infer” that the jury drew the most damaging rather than the least damaging meaning from the prosecutor’s statements.’ ” (People v. Covarrubias (2016) 1 Cal.5th 838, 894 .) “For a prosecutor’s remarks to constitute misconduct, it must appear reasonably likely in the context of the whole argument and instructions that ‘ “the jury understood or applied the complained-of comments in an improper or erroneous manner.” ’ ” (People v. Winbush (2017) 2 Cal.5th 4 2021A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” (Id. at p. 694.) “How readily deficient performance undermines confidence in the trial’s outcome will in part depend on the strength of the trial evidence on any decisive points.” (In re Gay, supra, 8 Cal.5th at p. 1087 .) “For a prosecutor’s remarks to constitute misconduct, it must appear reasonably likely in the context of the whole argument and instructions that ‘“the jury understood or applied the complained-of comments in an improper or erroneous manner.”’ [Citation.]” (People v. Winbush (2017) | 2 | 2021–2022 |
In re Gay
green
1 sentence2021A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” (Id. at p. 694.) “How readily deficient performance undermines confidence in the trial’s outcome will in part depend on the strength of the trial evidence on any decisive points.” (In re Gay, supra, 8 Cal.5th at p. 1087 .) “For a prosecutor’s remarks to constitute misconduct, it must appear reasonably likely in the context of the whole argument and instructions that ‘“the jury understood or applied the complained-of comments in an improper or erroneous manner.”’ [Citation.]” (People v. Winbush (2017) | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Kipp
green
1 sentence2021A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” (Id. at p. 694.) “How readily deficient performance undermines confidence in the trial’s outcome will in part depend on the strength of the trial evidence on any decisive points.” (In re Gay, supra, 8 Cal.5th at p. 1087 .) “For a prosecutor’s remarks to constitute misconduct, it must appear reasonably likely in the context of the whole argument and instructions that ‘“the jury understood or applied the complained-of comments in an improper or erroneous manner.”’ [Citation.]” (People v. Winbush (2017) | 1 | 2021–2021 |
In Re Alvernaz
green
1 sentence2013(See In re Alvernaz (1992) 2 Cal.4th 924, 945 ; see also Strickland v. Washington, supra, 466 U.S. at p. 697 [“[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by the defendant . . . . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.