Search for: "State v. Strickland"
Results 441 - 460
of 869
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Apr 2020, 6:30 am
Gross 19-1054Issues: (1) Whether a defendant who asserts that trial counsel failed to present key evidence is precluded from showing prejudice under Strickland v. [read post]
29 Mar 2016, 5:00 pm
Etherton 15-723Issue: Whether the Court of Appeals failed to apply either layer of the double deference due on federal habeas review when a state court’s Strickland v. [read post]
10 Dec 2019, 11:10 am
Texas, 18-9674Issue: Whether the standard for assessing ineffective assistance of counsel claims, announced in Strickland v. [read post]
23 May 2017, 2:32 pm
Strickland and Thornburg v. [read post]
20 Mar 2015, 5:00 pm
Supreme Court decision of Strickland v. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 10:49 am
Alabama, 16-9282, concerns how a prisoner can establish that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel under the familiar standard of Strickland v. [read post]
1 Sep 2013, 10:04 am
Strickland, 185 Ga. [read post]
25 May 2008, 10:16 pm
In United States v. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 3:11 pm
Roper Issue: Whether, under Strickland v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 9:10 am
United States v. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 8:27 pm
In its decision, the court also reaffirmed the standard established in Strickland v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 4:43 am
But the Second Circuit got a heaping pile of weird in United States v. [read post]
28 Oct 2017, 5:13 am
PD needed to establish the two-prong test in Strickland v. [read post]
23 Oct 2018, 11:53 am
Under 1984’s Strickland v. [read post]
16 Aug 2007, 7:10 pm
" Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 7:15 am
Shaw 13-897Issue: Whether, in a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a state appellate court’s holding that an omitted state law issue ultimately lacked merit precludes a federal habeas court from later finding either deficient performance or prejudice relating to that omission under the standards of Strickland v. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 6:40 pm
” See also United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2009, 8:40 am
Although the United States Supreme Court ruled in Baze v. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 2:45 pm
Ct. 1194 (1963), and Strickland v. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 12:35 pm
’” People v Gioglio, 296 Mich App 12 (2012), quoting Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668, 688, 694; 104 St Ct 2052; 80 L Ed 2d 674 (1984). [read post]
