Search for: "D. STRICKLAND"
Results 201 - 220
of 422
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Feb 2012, 8:10 am
She says that everything that drivers are doing in the vehicle with these devices is something they'd already be doing without the new technology. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 11:47 am
" I am willing to bet if Jesus was walking the Earth today, they'd all be lining up for condemn him as well, just like Jesus was condemned in the past for nothing! [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 8:18 am
After a series of increasingly sexually-tinged chats, Laureys suggested “’let her meet me and everything first . . . make sure she wants to do it haha . . . could start with just letting me watch her an[d you]. . . til she feels more comfortable. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 8:00 pm
§ 2254(d)(1), which means that we are without power to impose it on the Michigan state courts in this habeas case. [read post]
26 Aug 2004, 9:12 am
Moreover, counsel's failure to anticipate Blakely would not constitute unreasonable performance under Strickland because "First Circuit jurisprudence on this point ha[d] been well established. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 12:00 am
Strickland v. [read post]
27 Apr 2007, 7:42 pm
§ 2244(d)(1). [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 3:47 am
But deficient performance is only the first prong of the test for ineffective assistance laid down in Strickland v. [read post]
20 Jun 2020, 6:00 am
Incluso, no conoció al padre sino hasta el día de su testimonio, ni siquiera entrevistó a algún otro familiar. [read post]
8 Jan 2007, 6:08 am
Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 522-23, 123 S.Ct. 2527, 156 L.Ed.2d 471 (2003): In highlighting counsel's duty to investigate, and in referring to the ABA Standards for Criminal Justice as guides, we applied the same “clearly established” precedent of Strickland we apply today. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 8:03 pm
Criminal law -- Habeas corpus -- Counsel -- Ineffectiveness -- Petitioner was not entitled to habeas relief ordered by Court of Appeals, where state-court decision concluding that defendant had not established ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland was not unreasonable application of either part of Strickland rule -- Under 28 U.S.C. section 2254(d), federal habeas relief may not be granted with respect to any claim a state court has adjudicated on the merits,… [read post]
11 Mar 2024, 11:07 am
.'s Office filed a brief asserting that it had "carefully reviewed the facts and law and determined that Wharton's ineffectiveness claim fulfills the criteria articulated in Strickland v. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 9:00 pm
Representatives Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Linda Sanchez (D-CA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Mike Honda (D-CA), California Controller John Chiang, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, Change To Win’s Anna Burger, and AFL-CIO President John Sweeney will also speak. [read post]
16 Sep 2021, 9:53 am
(Judge Bress surely knows the difference between the "no deficient performance" and "no prejudice" prongs of Strickland; indeed, later in the opinion, on a different point about mitigating evidence, he expressly relies upon a "no prejudice" holding with respect to that -- separate -- issue.)So that part of the opinion seems just wrong.Judge Bress then follows this conclusion with what purports to be a separate point -- an effort to argue that, yeah,… [read post]
7 May 2014, 6:45 am
McNeal 13-963Issue: Whether, contrary to Strickland v. [read post]
30 Apr 2016, 10:45 am
Strickland to lead the federalization of their driverless car effort. [read post]
30 Apr 2016, 10:45 am
Strickland to lead the federalization of their driverless car effort. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 5:00 pm
Van Hook Issue: Under Strickland v. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 11:36 pm
" Strickland v. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 5:34 am
As Wikipedia notes, in Strickland v. [read post]
