Sixth Circuit· 4/6/2010

Goff v. Bagley

Citations

601 F.3d 445
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 7213
2010 WL 1286767

How courts have described this case

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

\Litigants are not permitted to use Rule 60(b) to circumvent the appeals process. 3 Plotkin v. Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co.
holding that the Supreme Court of Ohio’s conclusion that appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise “an obviously winning claim” on direct appeal was “an unreasonable application of federal law”
evaluating the reasonableness of appellate counsel’s conduct “[u]nder Ohio law at the time of [the petitioner’s] direct appeal”
holding there is no right to allocution under the federal constitution
granting a conditional writ of habeas corpus unless the state courts reopened the petitioner’s direct appeal within 120 days to permit petitioner to raise his allocution claim
finding prosecutor’s comments about the jury setting society’s standards of behavior improper

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Merritt, Moore, Gilman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

Other cases named Goff v. Bagley

4 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.