Jackson v. Conway

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that counsel’s alleged failure to introduce DNA reports was not ineffective assistance because, “while they may have been helpful to the defense they ‘did not have [any] exceptional value’ in light of the victim’s testimony . . . .”
• stating that habeas relief is proper where the court has “grave doubt about whether a trial error ... had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict .. ” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• conducting a “substantial and injurious effect” analysis under Brecht after determining that the state appellate court had objectively unreasonably applied Supreme Court precedent
• “A state prisoner’s procedural default in the state courts will also bar federal review except in narrow circumstances[.]”
• because the petitioner presented a new example of prosecutorial misconduct on habeas that he had not raised in state court, that portion of the prosecutorial misconduct claim was unexhausted
• “Thus, to argue that petitioner will rape anyone when he is horny is to encourage the jury to ignore the burden of proof and convict the jury before he can strike again.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).