§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Jakim Grimes, Appellant.

Brief

31 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 158,593 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "error by counsel" doesn't "warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding" where in the context of the whole proceeding the identified error "had no effect on the judgment"

  2. O'Sullivan v. Boerckel

    526 U.S. 838 (1999)   Cited 17,788 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to ensure exhaustion a petitioner must present their claims throughout "one complete round of the State's established appellate review process."

  3. Baldwin v. Reese

    541 U.S. 27 (2004)   Cited 5,805 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "ordinarily a state prisoner does not ‘fairly present’ a claim to a state court if that court must read beyond a petition or a brief (or a similar document) that does not alert it to the presence of a federal claim in order to find material ... that does so"

  4. Roe v. Flores-Ortega

    528 U.S. 470 (2000)   Cited 5,718 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding in criminal habeas context that counsel's failure to file a timely appeal is presumptively prejudicial, with no need for a "further showing from the defendant of the merits of his underlying claims"

  5. Evitts v. Lucey

    469 U.S. 387 (1985)   Cited 4,483 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the right to effective assistance of counsel includes the right to effective assistance of appellate counsel

  6. People v. Stultz

    2 N.Y.3d 277 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 3,231 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding "a defendant's showing of prejudice [to be] a significant but not indispensable element in assessing meaningful representation," focusing instead on "the fairness of the proceedings as a whole"

  7. People v. Benevento

    91 N.Y.2d 708 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 4,212 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-14 (1998), the New York Court of Appeals held that "meaningful representation" included a prejudice component which focuses on the "fairness of the process as a whole rather than [any] particular impact on the outcome of the case."

  8. Ross v. Moffitt

    417 U.S. 600 (1974)   Cited 1,577 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding criminal defendant's right to counsel at trial to be "fundamental"

  9. People v. Baldi

    54 N.Y.2d 137 (N.Y. 1981)   Cited 5,974 times   6 Legal Analyses
    In Baldi, the New York State Court of Appeals expressly applied the right to effective assistance of counsel guaranteed by the federal Constitution.

  10. Halbert v. Michigan

    545 U.S. 605 (2005)   Cited 487 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses require the appointment of counsel for indigent defendants seeking first-tier review of guilty or nolo contendere pleas in the intermediate state court of appeals, whose function is to review and "correct errors made by the lower courts," even though such review is discretionary under state law

  11. Section 500.20 - Criminal leave applications

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.20   Cited 31 times
    Permitting only one application for leave to appeal

  12. Section 500.1 - General requirements

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) All papers shall comply with applicable statutes and rules, particularly the signing requirement of section 130-1.1 -a of this Title. (b) Papers filed. Papers filed means briefs, papers submitted pursuant to sections 500.10 and 500.11 of this Part, motion papers, records and appendices. (c) Method of reproduction. All papers filed may be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black image on white paper. Reproduction on both sides of the paper is encouraged. (d) Designation