Search for: "Teague v. Teague"
Results 221 - 240
of 323
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
Collins v. [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 8:00 am
Walker v. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 11:56 am
Second, the precedent, pre-Padilla, supporting the application of Strickland in this context is insufficient to satisfy Teague v. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 4:00 am
Véase Pueblo v. [read post]
28 Dec 2008, 10:43 am
He lost a related case, Teague v. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 4:42 pm
"[T]rial counsel's duty of effective assistance includes the responsibility to advise the defendant concerning the exercise of [the] constitutional right" to testify at trial (Brown v Artuz, 124 F3d 73, 74, cert denied 522 US 1128; see People v Carpenter, 52 AD3d 729, lv denied 11 NY3d 830; People v Perry, 266 AD2d 151, 152, lv denied 95 NY2d 856). [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
Related blog posts: $750,000 Jury Verdict in Negligence Associated with Spinal Surgery $3.1 Million Jury Verdict for Death of Patient Following Heart Procedure; Estate of Teague v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 12:31 pm
The majority decided the issue under the rule of Teague v. [read post]
30 Oct 2019, 10:13 am
Ct. 718 (2016), the Court held that “Miller announced a substantive rule of constitutional law” that, under Teague v. [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 11:56 am
Teague, 956 F.2d 1427, 1432 (7th Cir. 1992); Eddmonds v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 12:51 pm
In both contexts, Johnson “narrows the the scope of a criminal statute by interpreting its terms,” Schriro, 542 U.S. at 351-52, it “alters the range of conduct or the class of persons that the law punishes,” id. at 352, and “prohibit[s] a certain category of punishment for a class of defendants because of their status or offense,” Saffle v. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 7:05 am
United States, which declared the Johnson rule substantive for purposes of the retroactivity analysis set forth in Teague v. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 7:18 pm
United States, which declared the Johnson rule substantive for purposes of the retroactivity analysis set forth in Teague v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 5:56 am
” Id. at *4; citing Teague v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 5:56 am
” Id. at *4; citing Teague v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 12:48 pm
Supreme Court has held that the Ring ruling is not retroactive as to those cases already final on direct appeal when Ring was decided, i.e., does not apply to cases on collateral attack under the non-retroactivity doctrine per Teague v. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 5:11 pm
Jan. 26, 2012) (finding Padilla not retroactively applicable after detailed Teague v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 8:01 am
In United States v. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 12:16 am
" Cole v. [read post]
2 Oct 2012, 7:03 am
Teague, when an employee of a government contractor accessed a government database to obtain President Obama’s student loan records; and in International Airport Centers, LLC v. [read post]
