Search for: "Harrington v. Georgia"
Results 1 - 20
of 26
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Nov 2023, 10:58 am
The justices will hear oral argument on Dec. 4 in one of their highest-profile bankruptcy cases in recent memory: Harrington v. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 1:13 pm
Monday, Dec. 4, 2023 Harrington v. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court will hear Harrington v. [read post]
12 Oct 2023, 6:29 pm
Harrington v. [read post]
17 Sep 2023, 12:56 pm
Harrington, history prof at Vanderbilt University. [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 9:00 pm
Pinholster, and Harrington v. [read post]
27 Jul 2020, 7:04 am
(Trump v. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 9:18 am
Clayton County, Georgia Espinoza and Price Waterhouse v. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 12:54 pm
Radostitz then cited Kyles v. [read post]
19 Dec 2018, 3:00 am
Supreme Court’s Wayfair v. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 10:19 am
But in 2011, the court in Harrington v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:06 am
Georgia Court of Appeals Hampton v. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 8:01 am
But in 2011, the court in Harrington v. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 1:11 pm
In its 2011 decision in Harrington v. [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 10:20 am
Although it had long "'look[ed] through' summary decisions by state appellate courts," the Eleventh Circuit believed that a recent decision of this Court--Harrington v. [read post]
29 May 2015, 2:24 pm
The petition in that capital case asks whether the Georgia courts erred in failing to recognize race discrimination prohibited under Batson v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 7:44 am
” [Flint River Steamboat Co. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 7:44 pm
McAninch can condemn a state court’s harmless-error decision as “so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement,” Harrington v. [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 7:05 pm
Pinholster, which held that habeas review is limited to the record that was before the state court; and (3) whether the decision of the Second Circuit affords the state court the deference required by 28 U.S.C § 2254(d), as interpreted by this Court in Harrington v. [read post]
