Search for: "U.S. v. Strickland" Results 41 - 60 of 561
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2022, 8:45 am by John Elwood
Texas, which were amply supported by the habeas and trial records, and whether the Texas court disregarded the Supreme Court’s express guidance for conducting a prejudice analysis pursuant to Strickland v. [read post]
20 May 2022, 6:39 am by John Elwood
Texas, which were amply supported by the habeas and trial records, and whether the Texas court disregarded the Supreme Court’s express guidance for conducting a prejudice analysis pursuant to Strickland v. [read post]
17 May 2022, 12:09 pm by Phil Dixon
Stop was not unreasonably extended, and the trial court did not err in crediting officer’s testimony U.S. v. [read post]
6 May 2022, 7:04 am by Shea Denning
Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), that the State suppressed favorable evidence. [read post]
12 Apr 2022, 11:46 am by John Elwood
Texas, which were amply supported by the habeas and trial records, and whether the Texas court disregarded the Supreme Court’s express guidance for conducting a prejudice analysis pursuant to Strickland v. [read post]
27 Feb 2022, 11:33 am by admin
., Learning, Memory & Cognition, 378 (2011). [4] Strickland v. [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 9:00 pm by Andrew Hamm
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit violated basic principles of Strickland v. [read post]
10 Dec 2021, 1:54 pm by Andrew Hamm
Texas, a capital defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. [read post]
30 Oct 2021, 12:07 pm by Andrew Hamm
Cronic — in which the Supreme Court suggested that, though Strickland v. [read post]
13 Jul 2021, 5:05 am by Eugene Volokh
  [229] PruneYard, 447 U.S. at 87. [230] 475 U.S. 1, 28 (1986). [231] See, e.g., Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act, S. 4534, 116th Cong., sec. 2(1)(b)(II) (2020) (exempting fro [read post]
18 May 2021, 4:28 pm by Phil Dixon
Defendant who did not submit to officers’ show of authority was not seized; alternatively, any seizure was supported by reasonable suspicion U.S. v. [read post]