Int of J. M. J., a Child v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[t]he fact that every circuit which had addressed [an] issue had rejected the proposition” did not constitute cause to overcome procedural default
• holding that Apprendi is not retroactively applicable to a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
• stating that the “Supreme Court has underscored the narrowness of this second [Teague ] exception”
• holding that “jurisdictional errors are not subject to plain- or harmless-error analysis”
• holding that Apprendi does not retroactively apply to § 2255 motions
• holding that Apprendi does not retroactively apply to § 2255 motions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).