Search for: "Strickland v. State"
Results 561 - 580
of 918
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Aug 2012, 11:39 am
Berzon argues that the state supreme court applied Strickland in a manner inconsistent with the Supreme Court's decisions regarding developing mitigation. [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 8:05 am
Cronic to cover counsel's brief absence from trial was an “extreme malfunction” entitling the petitioner to habeas relief; and (2) whether the Michigan courts reasonably determined that Donald had not shown Strickland v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:16 am
As to the harm prong of Strickland, the Court finds a reasonable probability that a jury would have accepted a proper presentation of mental health defense. [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 9:43 pm
Buck applies Strickland v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 12:11 pm
First, in Lafler v. [read post]
9 May 2014, 8:54 am
Sundquist, 13-852, a case involving the power of a state to restrict an out-of-state national bank’s exercise of its fiduciary powers in that state. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 7:47 am
State v. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 5:07 am
United States, No. 1:04-cr-00371 (N.D. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 2:38 pm
” Harrington v. [read post]
10 Mar 2009, 6:02 am
The 5-4 ruling in Bartland v. [read post]
30 May 2009, 12:29 pm
Council Issue: Whether the Supreme Court of South Carolina properly applied Strickland v. [read post]
26 Jan 2010, 9:30 am
Strickland v. [read post]
13 Jan 2010, 10:03 am
Strickland, Esq., Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, 2029 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA 90067. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 9:08 am
In Francis v. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 7:57 am
(The full opinion in Maples v. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 7:06 am
(The full opinion in Maples v. [read post]
10 May 2021, 3:06 pm
P.D.V-G., Appellant, v. [read post]
14 Jul 2012, 1:19 pm
See Jenkins v. [read post]
17 Jun 2008, 4:35 pm
Ted Strickland would do well to take action. [read post]
22 Oct 2010, 5:20 am
The post addressed the factual underpinnings of ineffective assistance, and didn't address whether the errors sufficed to meet the Strickland v. [read post]
