Henry GRISBY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James BLODGETT, Respondent-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that speculation about how an 25 expert might have testified is not enough to establish prejudice
• noting that federal precedent “establishes that, as a matter of law, a sentence of life without the possibility of parole is significantly different from a sentence of life with the possibility of parole” for purposes of the Jackson decision
• stating, in habeas case, “hearsay affidavits do not meet the requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)
• “Speculation about what an expert could have said is not enough to establish prejudice.”
• speculation about 5 unpresented evidence is not enough to support claim
• speculative prejudice claim insufficient to establish 6 Strickland standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).