Search for: "TEAGUE v. STATE"
Results 61 - 80
of 263
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2016, 7:05 am
United States, which declared the Johnson rule substantive for purposes of the retroactivity analysis set forth in Teague v. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 1:12 pm
In federal-habeas review and in some states’ post-conviction review processes, this inquiry centers on applying the federal-retroactivity analysis announced in Teague v. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 9:01 pm
The Court’s jurisdiction rested on an exception to the non-retroactivity of new rules.In Teague v. [read post]
14 May 2016, 8:27 am
Citing its 1989 precedent in Teague v. [read post]
6 May 2016, 2:18 pm
Kentucky and Teague v. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 10:53 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 11:59 am
United States, No. 15-6418:Last Term, this Court decided Johnson v. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 8:56 am
Despite the apparent clarity of this “rule,” the Court’s decision in Teague v. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 5:11 am
United States. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 8:07 am
” The Court noted that in Teague v. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 7:28 am
Lane; and (2) whether the United States Supreme Court has jurisdiction over a state court determination of retroactivity of a case on collateral review, when a state has both adopted and applied Teague. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 7:00 pm
Montgomery confirms that: Teague [v. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 9:26 am
The process that the Court uses to decide whether to make one of its criminal law rulings retroactive, to closed cases, dates from its 1989 ruling in Teague v. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 8:10 am
In essence, the federal rule of Teague v. [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 11:12 am
United States, No. 15-6418. [read post]
13 Nov 2015, 8:41 am
The majority concluded that the rule that the prisoner was seeking was a new one that didn't apply retroactively under Teague v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 12:31 pm
The majority decided the issue under the rule of Teague v. [read post]
28 Oct 2015, 6:28 pm
In United States v. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 8:51 pm
13 Oct 2015, 2:51 pm
A state can, if it likes, apply a new rule retroactively in its own courts even if the federal rule of Teague v. [read post]
