Search for: "Strickland v. Moore" Results 1 - 20 of 29
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jan 2011, 3:52 pm by Tung Yin
Justice Ginsburg's concurrence was much more mild: To prevail  under the  prejudice requirement of  Strickland v. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 6:20 am
Judge Moore concurs in the panle opinion, but the start of her concurrence reveals that she would like to see a different result: Constrained by the rule announced in Cooey v. [read post]
13 May 2018, 2:20 pm by Colleen Fitzharris, E.D. Mich.
When faced with a claim of juror bias, Remmer v. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 1:22 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCriminal Practice Sheriff's Deputies Ruled Entitled to Qualified Immunity From Suit Over Unauthorized Search Moore v. [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 1:34 am
Tiffany Brown and Agueybana Gonzalez KINGS COUNTYReal PropertySidewalk Law Obligates Property Owners to Repair Sidewalk Defect With One Half Inch Differential Moore v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 11:37 am by Bradley R. Hall, E.D. Mich.
Klee, No. 11-2531, a per curium unpublished decision by Judges Moore, Gibbons, and Sutton, the panel remanded the case for resolution of a Batson/Strickland claim in spite of a prior state court merits adjudication. [read post]
22 Dec 2008, 10:30 pm
Correll Issue: Whether the court of appeals properly applied the prejudice standard set forth in Strickland v. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 7:11 am
Strickland Issue: Whether a racial minority group that constitutes less than 50% of a proposed district's population can state a vote dilution claim under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 9:32 am
Strickland Issue: Whether a racial minority group that constitutes less than 50% of a proposed district's population can state a vote dilution claim under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. [read post]
26 Sep 2009, 7:52 am
Moore Issue: Did the Sixth Circuit properly interpret Faretta v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 7:16 am by Marcia Shein
As to the harm prong of Strickland, the Court finds a reasonable probability that a jury would have accepted a proper presentation of mental health defense. [read post]