Heck Van Tran v. Roland Colson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Tennessee state court’s Atkins determination was “contrary to clearly established governing law” as set forth in Tennessee Supreme Court precedent applying Atkins
• holding that the Tennessee state court’s Atkins determination was “contrary to clearly established governing law” as set forth in Tennessee Supreme Court precedent applying Atkins
• holding that the “state court’s application of Tennessee law with regard to whether [the defendant] is intellectually disabled under Atkins was contrary to clearly established federal law”
• holding that the “state court’s application of Tennessee law with regard to whether [the defendant] is intellectually disabled under Atkins was contrary to clearly established federal law”
• looking to governing state law in determining that the state court’s decision at issue was “contrary to clearly established Federal law” in the Atkins context
• “In Hall, the Court reasoned that the Constitution requires the courts and legislatures to follow clinical practices in defining intellectual disability.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).