21 Cited authorities

Harrington v. Richter
562 U.S. 86 (2011) Cited 26,329 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that AEDPA deference applies even when state court issues summary ruling
Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (1984) Cited 158,786 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"
Wiggins v. Smith
539 U.S. 510 (2003) Cited 9,480 times 45 Legal Analyses
Holding that counsel's performance was deficient when they failed to expand their investigation into the defendant's life history "after having acquired only rudimentary knowledge of his history from a narrow set of sources," especially when those sources indicated the existence of helpful mitigation evidence
Banks v. Dretke
540 U.S. 668 (2004) Cited 1,984 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that suppression of prosecution witness's police-informant status violated Brady
Jones v. Vacco
126 F.3d 408 (2d Cir. 1997) Cited 538 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[c]it[ation to] a specific constitutional provision or rel[iance] on federal constitutional precedents alerts state courts of the nature of the claim"
U.S. v. Payne
63 F.3d 1200 (2d Cir. 1995) Cited 328 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that failure to disclose affidavit that was available in a public court records was suppressed within the meaning of Brady because there was "no indication that Payne's counsel was aware of facts that would have required him to discover the affidavit through his own diligent investigation"
People v. Whalen
59 N.Y.2d 273 (N.Y. 1983) Cited 446 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Whalen, the defendant argued that identification evidence is "always suspect, so that, when a trial involves a close question of identity, the jury should receive an instruction emphasizing the scrutiny to be given to such evidence.
People v. Vilardi
76 N.Y.2d 67 (N.Y. 1990) Cited 343 times 3 Legal Analyses
Comparing the state law standard — whether there was a "reasonable possibility" that withheld evidence could have affected the result of the proceeding — to the federal standard of "reasonable probability"
People v. LaValle
3 N.Y.3d 88 (N.Y. 2004) Cited 176 times 4 Legal Analyses
Invalidating mandatory requirement to instruct the jury that, in the case of jury deadlock as to the appropriate sentence in a capital case, the defendant would receive a sentence of life imprisonment with parole eligibility after serving a minimum of 20 to 25 years
People v. Primo
96 N.Y.2d 351 (N.Y. 2001) Cited 183 times
Rejecting "clear link" test of earlier cases in favor of the "general balancing analysis that governs the admissibility of all evidence"

The People, Respondent,v.Julio Negron, Appellant.

21 Cited authorities

Holding that AEDPA deference applies even when state court issues summary ruling

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"

Holding that suppression of prosecution witness's police-informant status violated Brady

Holding that "[c]it[ation to] a specific constitutional provision or rel[iance] on federal constitutional precedents alerts state courts of the nature of the claim"

Holding that failure to disclose affidavit that was available in a public court records was suppressed within the meaning of Brady because there was "no indication that Payne's counsel was aware of facts that would have required him to discover the affidavit through his own diligent investigation"

In Whalen, the defendant argued that identification evidence is "always suspect, so that, when a trial involves a close question of identity, the jury should receive an instruction emphasizing the scrutiny to be given to such evidence.

Comparing the state law standard — whether there was a "reasonable possibility" that withheld evidence could have affected the result of the proceeding — to the federal standard of "reasonable probability"

Invalidating mandatory requirement to instruct the jury that, in the case of jury deadlock as to the appropriate sentence in a capital case, the defendant would receive a sentence of life imprisonment with parole eligibility after serving a minimum of 20 to 25 years

Rejecting "clear link" test of earlier cases in favor of the "general balancing analysis that governs the admissibility of all evidence"