Cummings v. Sirmons

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a petitioner's ineffective assistance claim failed to satisfy Strickland's first prong where the petitioner “never identified precisely what these purported experts would have testified to”
• holding petitioner could not overcome procedural bar because he “failed to come forward with any such [new] evidence, and thus cannot establish his claim of actual innocence”
• noting that “Oklahoma rarely, if ever, remands cases for such a hearing”
• concluding petitioner failed to establish his trial counsel acted deficiently in failing to investigate and present information from purported experts where he never identified precisely what the purported experts would have testified to
• rejecting a claim of ineffective assistance based on advice against testifying in order to protect the defendant from damaging cross-examination
• analyzing a murder conviction, and noting that DNA exclusion was only “marginally beneficial” where petitioner spent significant time in bed with an unclothed child

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).