Wiggins v. Smith

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

Grogan v. Garner

Holding that "the standard of proof for the dischargeability exceptions in 11 U.S.C. § 523 is the ordinary preponderance-of-the-evidence standard"

Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.

Holding that mental disability is not a quasi-suspect class

Chapman v. California

Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"

U.S. v. Gonzalez-Lopez

Holding that a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice does not require showing prejudice

Boykin v. Alabama

Holding that a silent record is insufficient for a waiver of certain specified rights not at issue here

Sullivan v. Louisiana

Holding that a constitutionally deficient reasonable doubt instruction constitutes structural error as the deprivation of the right to trial by jury has "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate" consequences and "unquestionably qualifies as ‘structural error’ "

Chambers v. Mississippi

Holding that the application of the rule against hearsay to exclude exculpatory testimony violated the defendant's right to present a complete defense because the testimony was reliable

Deck v. Missouri

Holding that the Constitution "prohibit the use of physical restraints visible to the jury absent a trial court determination, in the exercise of its discretion, that they are justified by a state interest specific to a particular trial"

Florida v. Nixon

Holding that counsel provided effective assistance when he conceded the defendant's guilt during a capital murder trial while maintaining the right to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses, because this was acceptable strategy to focus his preparation on finding and presenting mitigating evidence during the penalty phase in an attempt to ward off the death penalty

Rule 34 - Oral Argument

Explaining that a three-judge panel can dispense with oral argument if the panel "unanimously agrees that oral argument is unnecessary" for any of three enumerated reasons

Section 523 - Exceptions to discharge

Granting federal courts exclusive jurisdiction over certain dischargeability disputes

Section 158 - Appeals

Granting district courts appellate jurisdiction over "final judgments, orders, and decrees" of bankruptcy courts

Rule 8.630 - Briefs by parties and amicus curiae