Search for: "State v. Brecht"
Results 41 - 60
of 65
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jun 2013, 12:50 pm
Perry and United States v. [read post]
29 May 2013, 11:36 am
Woodall, 12-794, both state-on-top habeas cases. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 1:29 pm
Pliler, which held that Brecht is applied without regard to the state's harmlessness determination. [read post]
20 Feb 2011, 8:10 pm
From the first drafts of the upcoming edition: For the Condemned State v. [read post]
21 Nov 2010, 2:22 am
Galaza, (9th Cir.2002) ("We need not conduct a harmless error review of Strickland [ineffective assistance of counsel] violations under Brecht [v. [read post]
7 Oct 2010, 12:30 pm
”The Sheldon Abend Revocable Trust, v. [read post]
7 Oct 2010, 12:27 pm
Mason, 527 F.3d 252, 255 (2d Cir. 2008) (citing United States v. [read post]
27 May 2010, 7:55 pm
Brecht v. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 9:47 am
Bartee, No. 07-1526 Denial of habeas corpus relief from a conviction for, inter alia, armed assault with intent to kill is affirmed where, regardless of whether petitioner defaulted on claims due to Massachusetts contemporaneous objection rule or whether the state ruling was contrary to or constituted an unreasonable application of federal law, he was unable to show the indispensable habeas requirement of "prejudice" under Brecht v. [read post]
2 Apr 2008, 3:38 am
" United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2007, 9:56 pm
" After Roe v. [read post]
4 Nov 2007, 2:09 pm
Supreme Court's retroactivity analysis as stated in Teague v. [read post]
28 Jul 2007, 9:32 am
Alaska, and this error was notharmless under the Brecht standard. [read post]
13 Jun 2007, 7:19 am
s verdict under Brecht v. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 3:44 pm
The Court also rejected Fry's argument that AEDPA and the Court's 2003 decision in Mitchell v. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 8:26 am
The Court concluded that a federal habeas court must assess the prejudicial impact of constitutional error in a state court court criminal trial under the "substantial and injurious effect" standard set forth in Brecht v. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 8:03 am
Pliler (06-5427), holding that a federal habeas court in judging whether a constitutional error at the trial was harmless must decide whether the error satisfies the strict standard of Brecht v. [read post]
23 Mar 2007, 9:57 am
California or Brecht v. [read post]
22 Mar 2007, 2:37 am
California or the 'substantial and injurious effect' standard of Brecht v. [read post]
