Search for: ""Teague v. Lane" OR "489 U.S. 288""
Results 21 - 40
of 47
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Feb 2013, 2:33 pm
Commonwealth of Kentucky 559 U.S. _____, does not apply retroactively under the Teague Rule 489 U.S. 288 (1989). [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 11:56 am
Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 310 (1989). [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 5:56 am
Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 310 (1989). [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 5:56 am
Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 310 (1989). [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 3:46 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 1:37 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 7:21 pm
The Court applied the federal analysis set forth in Teague v. [read post]
28 Aug 2011, 8:20 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), a new rule may not be applied retroactively unless it falls into one of two exceptions that plainly do not encompass the Padilla holding. [read post]
27 Aug 2011, 8:54 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), a new rule may not be applied retroactively unless it falls into one of two exceptions that plainly do not encompass the Padilla holding. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 4:55 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), and consequently applied its holding to Petitioner Roselva Chaidez’s collateral appeal. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 8:06 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 6:48 am
See Teague v. [read post]
4 Feb 2011, 11:27 am
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), and does not apply retroactively to cases challenged on collateral review. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 9:46 am
Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, in 1987 and for collateral review in Teague v. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 2:21 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 301 (1989)). [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 3:04 pm
” Teague, 489 U.S. at 301; see also Butler v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 3:05 pm
Lane,489 U.S. 288 (1989).) [read post]
24 May 2010, 1:05 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) and the AEDPA rule of 28 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 9:00 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 311-12 (1989) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 9:50 am
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), to determine whether United States Supreme Court decisions apply retroactively to state-court criminal cases, or whether a state court may apply state-law- or state-constitution-based retroactivity tests that afford application of Supreme Court decisions to a broader class of criminal defendants than the class defined by Teague.The Court held that Teague does not constrain the authority of state courts to give broader effect to… [read post]
