61 Cited authorities

Harrington v. Richter
562 U.S. 86 (2011) Cited 26,352 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 158,894 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"
Padilla v. Kentucky
559 U.S. 356 (2010) Cited 8,616 times 131 Legal Analyses
Holding that counsel has a duty under the Sixth Amendment to inform a noncitizen defendant that his plea would make him eligible for deportation
Brady v. Maryland
373 U.S. 83 (1963) Cited 43,445 times 133 Legal Analyses
Holding that the prosecution violates due process when it suppresses material, favorable evidence
Yarborough v. Gentry
540 U.S. 1 (2003) Cited 3,427 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that counsel was not ineffective when his closing argument made "several key points," even if he omitted others that "would unquestionably have supported the defense"
Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano
563 U.S. 2011 (2011) Cited 1,338 times 57 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs had adequately pled a Rule 10b–5 claim—where defendant had disputed the sufficiency of the allegations with respect to the elements of scienter and materiality—by alleging that defendant had forestalled a stock price drop by making affirmative statements confirming the market's impression that defendant's leading product was safe, despite defendant's awareness of evidence suggesting a significant risk that the nasal spray led to loss of sense of smell; when the risk was finally (belatedly) disclosed, the stock price plummeted
Hinton v. Alabama
571 U.S. 263 (2014) Cited 844 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing apparently to understand relevant law relating to expert testimony at trial
Carlisle v. United States
517 U.S. 416 (1996) Cited 972 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a district court could not use inherent authority to extend a plain and unambiguous Rule of Criminal Procedure that limited district court’s authority to enter a judgment of acquittal to seven days
Chandler v. U.S.
218 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2000) Cited 2,518 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the ineffectiveness prong of Strickland is a high bar, requiring a showing that “no competent counsel would have taken [the action in question]”
United States v. Denedo
556 U.S. 904 (2009) Cited 420 times 6 Legal Analyses
Finding that a military court's jurisdiction to issue the writ of coram nobis "derives from the earlier jurisdiction it exercised to hear and determine the validity of the conviction on direct review"
Section 2255 - Federal custody; remedies on motion attacking sentence
28 U.S.C. § 2255 Cited 129,393 times 129 Legal Analyses
Adopting one-year limitations period for §2255 motions
Section 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television
18 U.S.C. § 1343 Cited 11,950 times 170 Legal Analyses
Barring fraudulent schemes "for obtaining money or property"
Rule 802 - The Rule Against Hearsay
Fed. R. Evid. 802 Cited 3,826 times 11 Legal Analyses
Recognizing federal statutes, the Federal Rules of Evidence, or Supreme Court rules as sources for exceptions to the rule against hearsay
Section 331 - Prohibited acts
21 U.S.C. § 331 Cited 1,512 times 105 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting the sale of adulterated foods
Section 515 - Authority for legal proceedings; commission, oath, and salary for special attorneys
28 U.S.C. § 515 Cited 265 times
Granting Attorney General or any other officer of the DOJ or specially appointed attorney to conduct "any kind of legal proceeding, civil or criminal, including grand jury proceedings"

USA v. Harkonen

61 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 counsel has a duty under the Sixth Amendment to inform a noncitizen defendant that his plea would make him eligible for deportation

Holding that the prosecution violates due process when it suppresses material, favorable evidence

Holding that counsel was not ineffective when his closing argument made "several key points," even if he omitted others that "would unquestionably have supported the defense"

Holding that counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing apparently to understand relevant law relating to expert testimony at trial

Holding that a district court could not use inherent authority to extend a plain and unambiguous Rule of Criminal Procedure that limited district court’s authority to enter a judgment of acquittal to seven days

Holding that the ineffectiveness prong of Strickland is a high bar, requiring a showing that “no competent counsel would have taken [the action in question]”

Finding that a military court's jurisdiction to issue the writ of coram nobis "derives from the earlier jurisdiction it exercised to hear and determine the validity of the conviction on direct review"

Adopting one-year limitations period for §2255 motions

Barring fraudulent schemes "for obtaining money or property"

Recognizing federal statutes, the Federal Rules of Evidence, or Supreme Court rules as sources for exceptions to the rule against hearsay

Prohibiting the sale of adulterated foods

Granting Attorney General or any other officer of the DOJ or specially appointed attorney to conduct "any kind of legal proceeding, civil or criminal, including grand jury proceedings"