Heard v. Addison

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that counsel was constitutionally ineffective, in a state court trial, for failing to discover two “unpublished decisions” by the state’s highest court of criminal appeals
• holding that a “ ‘mere allegation that [the petitioner] would have insisted on trial but for his counsel’s errors ... is ultimately insufficient’” to justify relief
• explaining that deference owed to state-court interpretations of state law “applies with equal force to interpretations of state law ‘announced on direct appeal of the challenged conviction’” (quoting Bradshaw v. Richey, 546 U.S. 74, 76 (2005)
• noting that this issue has “caused some confusion among the circuits”
• declining to consider in habeas appeal a claim that was not raised in district court
• “[W]e remain suspicious of bald, post hoc and unsupported statements that a defendant would have changed his plea absent counsel’s errors . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).