In re Reno

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that habeas counsel was not required to raise claims that had been previously rejected in other cases in order to provide effective assistance
• stating that \the mere omission of a claim developed by new counsel does not raise a presumption that prior habeas corpus counsel was incompetent\ (quotation marks omitted)
• explaining that habeas counsel's failure to raise claims previously rejected in other• cases is not objectively unreasonable where there is no legitimate• and asserted ground for revisiting the issue
• indicating that allegations of ineffective assistance by prior counsel in omitting claims were belied by the record where those claims were actually raised on appeal or in a prior habeas petition
• observing that the mere omission of a claim that has been further developed by new counsel \does not raise a presumption that prior habeas corpus counsel was incompetent\ (quoting In re Clark, 855 P.2d 729, 749 (Cal. 1993))
• observing that the mere omission of a claim that has been further developed by new counsel \does not raise a presumption that prior habeas corpus counsel was incompetent\ (quoting In re Clark, 855 P.2d 729, 749 (Cal. 1993))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).