17 Cited authorities

  1. Harrington v. Richter

    562 U.S. 86 (2011)   Cited 27,130 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 161,180 times   179 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ineffective assistance of counsel requires two showings: one, that "counsel's performance was deficient," and two, that "the deficient performance prejudiced the defense"
  3. Williams v. Taylor

    529 U.S. 362 (2000)   Cited 38,341 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. O'Sullivan v. Boerckel

    526 U.S. 838 (1999)   Cited 18,229 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."
  5. Lockyer v. Andrade

    538 U.S. 63 (2003)   Cited 11,274 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that pro se prisoner's timely motion for an extension to file an appeal was the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal
  6. Taylor v. Maddox

    366 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,690 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state court's clear misapprehension or misstatement of the record that "goes to a material factual issue that is central to petitioner's claim" and a state court's "failure to consider and weigh relevant evidence" that is "highly probative and central to the petitioner's claim" can render "the resulting factual finding unreasonable"
  7. Peterson v. Lampert

    319 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,087 times
    Holding that the circumstances were insufficient to alert the state appellate court that petitioner was seeking review of a particular federal issue
  8. Paulino v. Castro

    371 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 354 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California's rule requiring that a party make a contemporaneous objection to preserve an issue for appeal is an adequate and independent state rule
  9. Hedlund v. Ryan

    750 F.3d 793 (9th Cir. 2014)   Cited 31 times
    Finding no Eddings error
  10. Jamison v. Consolidated Utilities, Inc.

    576 P.2d 97 (Alaska 1978)   Cited 74 times
    Discussing relevant criteria for quasi-estoppel claim, including whether party asserting inconsistent position gained advantage through first position, magnitude of inconsistency, changed circumstances, whether inconsistency was relied on by party to his detriment, and whether first assertion made with full knowledge of facts
  11. Section 2254 - State custody; remedies in Federal courts

    28 U.S.C. § 2254   Cited 207,913 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"