Dennis Skillicorn v. Al Luebbers

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that counsel was not ineffective for failing to elicit testimony that the Missouri Supreme Court had already concluded was inadmissible during post-conviction proceedings
• recognizing the scope of review of the State court’s determination of whether evidence was sufficient is “extremely limited”
• recognizing the scope of review of the state court’s determination of whether evidence was sufficient is “extremely limited”
• recognizing the scope of review of the state court’s determination of whether evidence was sufficient is “extremely limited”
• although raised by the petitioner, “the Missouri court did not adjudicate a federal due process claim with regard to this issue. Accordingly, our standard of review is less deferential.”
• no prejudice on a similar claim under § 2254 deference

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).