§Why CasetextPricing

RENO ON H.C.

Petitioner's Traverse

235 Cited authorities

  1. Coleman v. Thompson

    501 U.S. 722 (1991)   Cited 26,260 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"

  2. Schlup v. Delo

    513 U.S. 298 (1995)   Cited 18,024 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the actual innocence standard requires a petitioner "to make a stronger showing than that needed to establish prejudice" under Strickland

  3. Estelle v. McGuire

    502 U.S. 62 (1991)   Cited 19,985 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal habeas court may not reexamine state court determinations of state law questions

  4. Murray v. Carrier

    477 U.S. 478 (1986)   Cited 16,464 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel may provide cause for a procedural default

  5. Kyles v. Whitley

    514 U.S. 419 (1995)   Cited 7,265 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding the State's disclosure obligation turns on the cumulative effect of all suppressed evidence favorable to the defense

  6. Ring v. Arizona

    536 U.S. 584 (2002)   Cited 4,999 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[i]f a State makes an increase in a defendant's authorized punishment contingent on the finding of a fact, that fact—no matter how the State labels it—must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt”

  7. Ylst v. Nunnemaker

    501 U.S. 797 (1991)   Cited 7,246 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if "the last reasoned opinion on [a habeas] claim explicitly imposes a procedural default," federal courts "will presume that a later decision rejecting the claim did not silently disregard that bar"

  8. Wolff v. McDonnell

    418 U.S. 539 (1974)   Cited 19,255 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that declaratory judgment as a predicate to a damages award would not be barred, but that a civil rights claim that would affect the duration of incarceration is foreclosed by Preiser

  9. Herrera v. Collins

    506 U.S. 390 (1993)   Cited 5,532 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the threshold showing for such an assumed right [of actual innocence] would necessarily be extraordinarily high"

  10. McCleskey v. Zant

    499 U.S. 467 (1991)   Cited 5,314 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "colorable showing of factual innocence" satisfies the "ends of justice" requirement

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

    28 U.S.C. § 2254   Cited 204,528 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. Section 288 - Lewd or lascivious act upon child under age of 14 years

    Cal. Pen. Code § 288   Cited 9,316 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Defining crime of conviction

  13. Section 1538.5 - Motion for return of property or to suppress evidence

    Cal. Pen. Code § 1538.5   Cited 5,552 times
    Providing California criminal defendants with the ability to move for the suppression of unconstitutionally obtained evidence

  14. Section 353 - Reversal for erroneous admission of evidence

    Cal. Evid. Code § 353   Cited 3,794 times
    Finding shall not be set aside and decision shall not be reversed due to erroneous admission of evidence unless timely objection was made

  15. Section 9 - Powers Denied to Congress

    U.S. Const. art. I, § 9   Cited 2,773 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting Congress

  16. Section 190.3 - Death penalty for defendant found guilty of first degree murder with special circumstance

    Cal. Pen. Code § 190.3   Cited 821 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Providing that, "[i]n determining the penalty, the trier of fact shall take into account" any relevant listed factors

  17. Section 11

    Cal. Const. art. I § 11   Cited 148 times
    Limiting state government's power to suspend writ of habeas corpus

  18. Section 1054.9 - Reasonable access to discovery materials upon prosecution of postconviction writ of habeas corpus or motion to vacate judgment

    Cal. Pen. Code § 1054.9   Cited 141 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Allowing postconviction discovery in cases involving a criminal conviction of a serious felony or a violent felony resulting in a sentence of 15 years or more

  19. Section 1484 - Hearing of proof

    Cal. Pen. Code § 1484   Cited 107 times

    The party brought before the Court or Judge, on the return of the writ, may deny or controvert any of the material facts or matters set forth in the return, or except to the sufficiency thereof, or allege any fact to show either that his imprisonment or detention is unlawful, or that he is entitled to his discharge. The Court or Judge must thereupon proceed in a summary way to hear such proof as may be produced against such imprisonment or detention, or in favor of the same, and to dispose of such

  20. Section 3604 - Lethal gas or injection

    Cal. Pen. Code § 3604   Cited 45 times

    (a) The punishment of death shall be inflicted by the administration of a lethal gas or by an intravenous injection of a substance or substances in a lethal quantity sufficient to cause death, by standards established under the direction of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. (b) Persons sentenced to death prior to or after the operative date of this subdivision shall have the opportunity to elect to have the punishment imposed by lethal gas or lethal injection. This choice shall be

  21. Rule 8.386 - Proceedings if the return is ordered to be filed in the reviewing court

    Cal. R. 8.386   Cited 24 times

    (a) Application This rule applies if the Supreme Court orders the return to be filed in the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal or if the Court of Appeal orders the return to be filed in the Court of Appeal. (b)Serving and filing return (1) Unless the court orders otherwise, any return must be served and filed within 30 days after the court issues the order to show cause. (2) If the return is filed in the Supreme Court, the respondent must file the number of copies of the return and any supporting

  22. Rule 8.605 - Qualifications of counsel in death penalty appeals

    Cal. R. 8.605   Cited 6 times

    (a) Purpose This rule defines the minimum qualifications for attorneys appointed by the Supreme Court in death penalty appeals. These minimum qualifications are designed to promote competent representation and to avoid unnecessary delay and expense by assisting the court in appointing qualified counsel. Nothing in this rule is intended to be used as a standard by which to measure whether the defendant received effective assistance of counsel. An attorney is not entitled to appointment simply because