Cornell v. Kirkpatrick

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that state’s consistent statement to the district court that petitioner had exhausted his particular claim, meant that on appeal, state could not then argue that petitioner had failed to exhaust that claim
• holding that before considering a petitioner’s habeas corpus application, the Court must “determine if he exhausted all of his state remedies in pursuing his ineffective of assistance of counsel claims”
• holding that overlooking favorable controlling precedent determining venue as a result of shoddy research was deficient representation where it was determinative of whether two sexual as- sault charges could be tried together
• holding that state’s consistent statement to the district court that petitioner had exhausted his particular claim, meant that on appeal, state could not then argue that petitioner had failed to exhaust that claim
• granting habeas relief only as to the “portion of the indictment” where venue was improper

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).