Search for: "Strickland v. State"
Results 821 - 840
of 918
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
Strickland (07-689), on whether a racial minority group that makes up less than 50 percent of a proposed legislative district can state a vote dilution claim under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 1:59 pm
Strickland (07-689). [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 3:37 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
Strickland (07-689), on whether a racial minority group that makes up less than 50 percent of a proposed legislative district can state a vote dilution claim under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act; Pearson v. [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 8:17 pm
Ted Strickland Southern District of Ohio at Columbus 08a0369p.06 2008/10/10 Johnson v. [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 8:13 pm
Wingerter v. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 7:06 pm
Since counsel framed the claim exclusively in therms of the United States Constitution that Copurt applied the federal test for IAC set forth in Strickland v Washington (466 US 668); see People v McDonald, 1 NY3d 109, 114-115).On appeal Ms. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 3:11 pm
Roper Issue: Whether, under Strickland v. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 8:29 pm
Torres, No. 072331 Sentence of 188 to 235 months for possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute is affirmed where: 1) the court did not abuse its discretion in counting both the state drug offense and the state gun offense as contributing to defendant's status as a career offender; 2) the district court was correct in finding the state gun conviction to be a "crime of violence" for career-offender purposes; and 3) district court was compelled to… [read post]
8 Sep 2008, 12:57 pm
Last week, I reported on the Sixth Circuit decision in VanHook v Anderson recognizing that post-Strickland decisions from the United States Supreme Court have tightened the duty of investigation required by defense counsel. [read post]
5 Sep 2008, 2:29 am
Since the Court’s 1984 ruling in Strickland v Washington, the United States Supreme Court has applied a two part test for determining whether counsel was ineffective: (a) whether there was a breach of counsel’s duty to the defendant; and, (b) “but for” that error, the defendant stood a reasonable chance for acquittal. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:17 pm
State of Tennessee, No. 06-6208 In civil rights suit alleging that city police discriminated against plaintiffs in violation of the Ame [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:29 pm
Strickland, No. 07-3600 A provision of Ohio Rev. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:15 pm
Mitchell, No. 02-3505 Denial of a petition for habeas relief in a death penalty case is reversed where: 1) a state court applied the Strickland standard in an objectively unreasonable manner for purposes of claims that petitioner's counsel were ineffective in preparing for the sentencing phase of his trial; 2) the state court unreasonably determined that the alleged errors of trial counsel did not prejudice petitioner's case; and 3) a state court… [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 1:11 am
Strickland Northern District of Ohio at ClevelandSUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. [read post]
24 Aug 2008, 9:29 pm
Strickland, No. 07-3600, that Ohio Rev. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 6:38 pm
Wrinkles instead claimed that he received ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 7:06 pm
Kaylo, No. 07-30024 Denial of a habeas corpus petition alleging that state prosecutors had committed Brady violations is reversed where the prosecution had withheld material impeachment evidence during defendant's manslaughter trial. [read post]
2 Aug 2008, 12:29 am
The state courts applied the state version of Strickland. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 2:47 pm
SEE STRICKLAND v. [read post]
