Tenth Circuit· 11/26/2002
Hung Thanh Le v. Mullin
Citations
- 311 F.3d 1002
- 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 24183
- 2002 WL 31662748
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to request a self-defense instruction, where the evidence did not permit such instruction under Oklahoma law
- holding that defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to request a self-defense instruction, where the evidence did not permit such instruction under Oklahoma law
- criticizing prosecutor for mischaracterizing evidence and suggesting that defendant had committed other murders when such facts were not in evidence
- asking whether the jury was able “to judge the evidence fairly in light of the prosecutor’s conduct”
- finding it improper to tell the jury they \could only do justice in this case by bringing in a verdict of death\ (internal quotation marks omitted)
- finding it improper to tell the jury they “could only do justice in this case by 64 bringing in a verdict of death” (internal quotation marks omitted)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Briscoe, Ebel, Henry, Per Curiam
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
55 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Bland v. SirmonsTenth Circuit· 2006-08-03· cited 328×
- Cargle v. MullinTenth Circuit· 2003-01-27· cited 310×
- Grant v. RoyalTenth Circuit· 2018-03-30· cited 209×
- Parker v. ScottTenth Circuit· 2005-01-05· cited 151×
- Littlejohn v. TrammellTenth Circuit· 2013-01-07· cited 149×
- Douglas v. WorkmanTenth Circuit· 2009-03-26· cited 148×
- Gipson v. JordanTenth Circuit· 2004-08-02· cited 147×
- Wilson v. SirmonsTenth Circuit· 2008-08-08· cited 147×
- Spears v. MullinTenth Circuit· 2003-08-12· cited 134×
- Thornburg v. MullinTenth Circuit· 2005-09-07· cited 112×
- Simpson v. CarpenterTenth Circuit· 2018-12-27· cited 110×
- Hanson v. SherrodTenth Circuit· 2015-08-13· cited 84×
- Smith v. WorkmanTenth Circuit· 2008-12-30· cited 80×
- Malicoat v. MullinTenth Circuit· 2005-10-11· cited 79×
- Stouffer v. TrammellTenth Circuit· 2013-12-26· cited 77×
- Patton v. MullinTenth Circuit· 2005-09-21· cited 76×
- United States v. JohnsonEighth Circuit· 2007-07-30· cited 75×
- John R. Hicks v. Terry Collins, WardenSixth Circuit· 2004-09-15· cited 73×
- Black v. WorkmanTenth Circuit· 2012-06-14· cited 73×
- Brown v. SirmonsTenth Circuit· 2008-02-05· cited 68×
Cites
56 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court· 2000-04-26· cited 41,291×
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court· 2000-04-18· cited 15,929×
- Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court· 1993-06-07· cited 7,022×
- United States v. CronicSupreme Court· 1984-05-14· cited 6,497×
- Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1935-04-15· cited 4,581×
- Darden v. WainwrightSupreme Court· 1986-09-03· cited 4,161×
- Donnelly v. DeChristoforoSupreme Court· 1974-05-13· cited 3,922×
- Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court· 1991-09-13· cited 3,458×
- Eddings v. OklahomaSupreme Court· 1982-01-19· cited 3,271×
- Woodson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court· 1976-07-02· cited 2,907×
- Caldwell v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1985-06-11· cited 2,827×
- Zant v. StephensSupreme Court· 1983-06-22· cited 2,410×
- Gardner v. FloridaSupreme Court· 1977-03-22· cited 1,935×
- Semtek International Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.Supreme Court· 2001-02-27· cited 1,165×
- Tuilaepa v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1994-06-30· cited 983×
- United States v. Luis Anthony RiveraTenth Circuit· 1990-04-04· cited 491×
- Burks v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1979-01-23· cited 375×
- Viereck v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1943-03-01· cited 360×
- Aycox v. LytleTenth Circuit· 1999-11-16· cited 282×
Other cases named Hung Thanh Le v. Mullin
2 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.