Search for: "Strickland v. State" Results 321 - 340 of 863
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Nov 2013, 11:09 pm by Cynthia Alkon
  The Court instead stated that the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty (AEPDA) amendments in federal habeas law and Strickland v. [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 12:42 pm by Rory Little
  And AEDPA and Strickland, writes the Court, “do not permit federal judges to so casually second-guess the decisions of their state-court colleagues. [read post]
9 Oct 2013, 7:40 am by Rory Little
  As he put it to close the day, “record silence under AEDPA and Strickland means the State wins. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 7:12 am by Rory Little
When the Supreme Court, two Terms ago, extended Strickland’s “ineffective assistance of counsel” doctrine to plea negotiations (Lafler v. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:19 pm
  The standard for showing ineffective assistance of counsel rising to a level that violates a defendant's constitutional rights to such a degree that would require a defendant to obtain a new trial is set forth in the 1984 United States Supreme Court decision of Strickland v. [read post]
19 Aug 2013, 3:52 pm by Stephen Bilkis
It was held in Strickland v Washington and People v Linares that a defendant in a criminal proceeding is constitutionally entitled to effective assistance of counsel. [read post]
8 Aug 2013, 2:42 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Defendant cites the recent United States Supreme Court decision of Jose Padilla v Kentucky, 130 S. [read post]
15 May 2013, 9:56 am by admin
Still, there is something to be said when the most recent standard of effective counsel, as provided by the Supreme Court in Strickland v. [read post]
23 Apr 2013, 12:43 pm by John Elwood
Chappell12-5890Issue: (1) In Strickland v. [read post]
16 Apr 2013, 12:50 pm by John Elwood
Chappell12-5890Issue: (1) In Strickland v. [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 8:27 am by Cicely Wilson
  Determination of the ownership of the property is likely possible without resolving religious questions.United States v. [read post]