First Circuit· 5/19/2011

Coningford v. Rhode Island

Citations

640 F.3d 478
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 10159
2011 WL 1887329

How courts have described this case

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

noting that \a misbegotten evidentiary ruling [in a state criminal trial] that results in a fundamentally unfair trial may violate due process\
explaining that a federal habeas court may reach the merits of an unexhausted claim to dismiss it
finding no “clearly established Supreme Court case law speaking directly to the admission of prior bad acts evidence”
allowing federal court “to dispose of [an unexhausted] claim once and for all” if it “is patently without merit”
describing severely limited scope of federal habeas relief where challenge is to state court’s evidentiary ruling
finding presentation of 404(b) issue in state court did not constitute a constitutional claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lynch, Selya, Howard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Coningford v. Rhode Island

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.