Oral argument

• Argued

  61 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• contrasting state-court decisions on the claim’s substantive validity with state-court decisions on other grounds
• “The question is whether an attorney’s 5 representation amounted to incompetence under ‘prevailing professional norms,’ not whether it 6 deviated from best practices or most common custom.”
• trial court’s ruling must be “so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement”
• “A state court's determination that a claim lacks merit precludes federal habeas relief so 23 long as fairminded jurists could disagree on the correctness of the state court's decision. . .”
• “There is no text in the statute requiring a statement of reasons.”
• “A state court’s determination that a claim lacks merit precludes habeas relief so long as ‘fairminded jurists could disagree’ on the correctness of the state court’s decision.” (quoting Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652, 664, 124 S.Ct. 2140, 158 L.Ed.2d 938 (2004))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).