§Why CasetextPricing

Escamilla v. Thaler, Director TDCJ-CID

RESPONSE

19 Cited authorities

  1. Harrington v. Richter

    562 U.S. 86 (2011)   Cited 26,575 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that AEDPA deference applies even when state court issues summary ruling

  2. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 159,625 times   179 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to establish ineffective assistance prejudice a petitioner "must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different," and " reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome"

  3. Williams v. Taylor

    529 U.S. 362 (2000)   Cited 37,937 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Holding that counsel's performance was deficient when their investigation failed to uncover "extensive records" filled with mitigation evidence concerning the defendant's family history, education, mental health, and rehabilitation

  4. Cullen v. Pinholster

    563 U.S. 170 (2011)   Cited 14,484 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that petitioner failed to show prejudice due to the extensive evidence that the prosecution presented

  5. Coleman v. Thompson

    501 U.S. 722 (1991)   Cited 26,364 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding in relevant part that federal habeas review of a procedurally defaulted claim is barred "unless the prisoner can demonstrate cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law"

  6. Estelle v. McGuire

    502 U.S. 62 (1991)   Cited 20,096 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions

  7. Wiggins v. Smith

    539 U.S. 510 (2003)   Cited 9,531 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

  8. Teague v. Lane

    489 U.S. 288 (1989)   Cited 7,724 times   99 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the rule announced in Taylor v. Louisiana requiring the jury venire be drawn from a fair cross section of the community is procedural and does not apply retroactively

  9. Lopez v. State

    343 S.W.3d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011)   Cited 1,028 times
    Holding requirements of second Strickland prong need not be considered if appellant fails to satisfy first Strickland prong

  10. Armstead v. Scott

    37 F.3d 202 (5th Cir. 1994)   Cited 635 times
    Holding that, where application was considered by same judge who presided over trial, a "paper" hearing is adequate

  11. Section 2254 - State custody; remedies in Federal courts

    28 U.S.C. § 2254   Cited 205,500 times   341 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a determination of a factual issue made by a State court shall be presumed to be correct" and "[t]he applicant shall have the burden of rebutting the presumption of correctness by clear and convincing evidence"

  12. Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 59   Cited 43,725 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a party to move to alter or amend a judgment "no later than 28 days after the entry of the judgment"