Andrew Sasser v. Ray Hobbs

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the “timing of proof’ matters in an Atkins claim because an individual’s intellectual disability can improve over time, and because an individual “may have better evidence of his condition at one point in life than another”
• remanding the case to the district court for an evidentiary hearing because petitioner was unable to develop his claim in State Court due to his appellate counsel’s ineffectiveness
• holding Martinez applies to Arkansas convictions
• “ ‘[I]t is unrealistic to expect trial counsel, who is also appellate counsel, to call into question his own competence.’ ”
• Martinez applicable in Arkansas cases because Arkansas does not generally afford defendants meaningful review of ineffective- assistance-of-trial-counsel claims on direct appeal
• Martinez applicable in Arkansas cases because Arkansas does not generally afford defendants meaningful review of ineffective- assistance-of-trial-counsel claims on direct appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).