Search for: "Strickland v. State"
Results 381 - 400
of 864
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2012, 11:32 am
This case was Strickland v. [read post]
17 Jun 2012, 9:15 am
Matthews v. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 5:36 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 8:46 am
The second is where appointed counsel in the initial-review collateral proceeding, where the claim should have been raised, was ineffective under the standards of Strickland v. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 8:46 am
The second is where appointed counsel in the initial-review collateral proceeding, where the claim should have been raised, was ineffective under the standards of Strickland v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 11:56 am
However, on March 31, 2010, the United States Supreme Court filed its decision in Padilla v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 10:55 am
State. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 10:55 am
State. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 5:56 am
” United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 5:56 am
” United States v. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 2:00 pm
§ 2254(e)(1)’s command that an underlying state-court fact determination must be presumed correct; (2) whether the Sixth Circuit violated Section 2254(d)(1) by granting habeas relief on a purportedly unreasonable application of state law; and (3) whether the Sixth Circuit violated § 2254(d)(1) by asserting its own prejudice standard – that a defendant “must only show that he had a substantial defense” – rather than the standard… [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 7:53 pm
Evans v. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 7:02 am
Lone Wolf v. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 7:02 am
Lone Wolf v. [read post]
31 May 2012, 12:43 pm
United States, 11-9711, Jackson v. [read post]
30 May 2012, 5:31 pm
CAAF’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 9:40 am
§ 2254(e)(1)’s command that an underlying state-court fact determination must be presumed correct; (2) whether the Sixth Circuit violated Section 2254(d)(1) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) by granting habeas relief on a purportedly unreasonable application of state law; and (3) whether the Sixth Circuit violated AEDPA § 2254(d)(1) by asserting its own prejudice standard – that a defendant “must only show that he had a… [read post]
24 May 2012, 12:14 am
Under the classic Supreme Court incompetence of counsel case, Strickland v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 4:00 pm
Next up is yet another state-on-top habeas case, Howes v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 7:49 pm
This is a follow up to my last post, where I discussed an opinion issued by the United States Supreme Court, Missouri v. [read post]
