People v. Brown
California Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceMosk, J.
I concur in the opinion of the court and especially in its reaffirmation of the so-called “reasonable-possibility” test as the appropriate standard of review for errors in the penalty phase of a capital case.
I write separately to explain why I feel compelled to adhere to that test.
In People v. Hamilton (1963) 60 Cal.2d 105 [32 Cal.Rptr. 4, 383 P.2d 412], this court construed the mandate of article VI, section 4 Vi of the state Constitution—the predecessor of current article VI, section 13—in the context of penalty phase error. In so doing, it effectively adopted what is now termed the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Woodson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.