Search for: "Cain v. State" Results 141 - 160 of 380
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Apr 2015, 7:51 am by Amy Howe
Cain, a capital case from Louisiana. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:49 pm by Jeff Gamso
 And they're up to 4 law clerks/staff attorneys each.From the oral argument before the court Monday morning in Brumfield v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 7:27 am by Dominic Yobbi
Cain [SCOTUSblog docket] the court will decide whether [Oyez Project summary] a state court's decision to deny an Atkins claim, when the defendant did not have the opportunity or funds to... [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 3:06 am by Amy Howe
Cain, a capital case from Louisiana. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 9:35 am by Lyle Denniston
Cain, the Justices and their clerks may need to start right away digging very deeply into at least twenty volumes of a record compiled in a state court. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 7:59 pm by Steven D. Schwinn
Cain, the case testing how state courts must consider evidence of mental retardation in death penalty sentencing proceedings. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 6:22 am by Timothy P. Flynn
The issue to be considered by the SCOTUS tomorrow morning in Brumfield v Cain is whether the 8th Amendment requires yet another separate hearing to solely consider evidence of the asserted mental disability.If such an evidentiary hearing is required, it would be a trial, within a trial, within a trial. [read post]
28 Mar 2015, 7:13 pm by CrimProf BlogEditor
Cain: (1) Whether a state court that considers the evidence presented at a petitioner’s penalty phase proceeding as determinative of the petitioner’s claim of mental retardation under... [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:35 pm by Kent Scheidegger
Louisiana, No. 14-6381, was moot because a settlement had been reached back in the state court.Apparently no one has told the Supreme Court that yet, and they have set the argument for March 30.Brumfield v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:57 am by Maureen Johnston
Cain 14-567Issue: (1) Whether, when evaluating if a state court’s decision is based upon an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence before the state court under 28 § U.S.C. 2254(d)(2), the clear and convincing standard of Section 2254(e)(1) governs the determination of unreasonableness; (2) whether the state court decision, finding no deficient performance, constituted an unreasonable application of Strickland v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 7:08 am by John Elwood
United States, 14-282, is yet another gift from the St. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 2:00 pm by John Elwood
Cain, 13-1433, a case that we were sure would result in a dissent from denial of cert. or somesuch. [read post]