Search for: "Teague v. Lane"
Results 61 - 80
of 167
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2005, 6:27 pm
Honestly, it's hard to see how Booker announced any "new right" at all (although many circuits have more or less said it did, for purposes of analyzing retroactivity under Teague v Lane, a related but not necessarily identical question, even in the cockamamie sense that the expression "new rule" is used for Teague v Lane purposes); what was *new* in Booker was the *remedy* not the "right" or the… [read post]
27 Aug 2011, 8:54 pm
Under Teague v. [read post]
27 Apr 2021, 3:22 pm
(If it were merely procedural, it would apply retroactively only if it were a watershed rule under the retroactivity framework established in Teague v. [read post]
29 Sep 2015, 2:34 pm
In a recent article, Perry Moriearty argued that Miller was a substantive change to the law and thus qualifies for one of Teague v. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 7:43 am
Third, the Supreme Court established in Teague v. [read post]
28 Aug 2011, 8:20 pm
Under Teague v. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 8:23 am
Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 311 (1989) (Teague was a plurality decision that later became a holding of the Court. [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 9:03 am
The question presented in Danforth is pretty simple: "Are state courts required to use the standard announced in Teague v. [read post]
7 Nov 2006, 10:36 am
Lane. [read post]
4 Feb 2011, 11:27 am
Aug. 25, 2010) (holding that Padilla did not create a new rule under Teague and was therefore retroactively applicable); United States v. [read post]
4 Nov 2007, 9:50 pm
In the 1989 case, Teague v. [read post]
20 May 2021, 7:01 am
Caniglia v. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 12:11 pm
On the retroactivity question, the Justices will be dealing with the continuing legal fall-out of a decision they issued in 1989, Teague v. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 3:30 pm
En Teague v. [read post]
20 Dec 2020, 11:48 am
Lane . . . . [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 8:56 am
Despite the apparent clarity of this “rule,” the Court’s decision in Teague v. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 9:00 pm
.' Teague v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 1:33 pm
Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989). [read post]
1 Nov 2007, 11:08 am
The Supreme Court said, in Teague v. [read post]
