Jeffrey Judkins v. State of Tennessee
Syllabus
Petitioner, Jeffrey Allen Judkins, appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in finding that he received the effective assistance of counsel at trial. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that where it is clear that the BIA considered evidence, the BIA need not discuss all nondispositive evidence
- holding that a BIA decision “cannot stand” where it “misstat[es] the record and fail[s] to mention highly probative or potentially dispositive evidence”
- holding that the agency must consider all evidence relevant to the possibility of future torture
- holding that the BIA’s decision cannot stand when it fails to mention highly probative or potentially disposi-tive evidence
- holding that “misstating the record and failing to mention highly probative or potentially dispositive evidence” indicates that the agency failed to consider all the evidence
- holding that the BIA’s decision cannot stand when it fails to mention highly probative or potentially dispositive evidence
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
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.