John Howard v. Hans G. Walker

How courts have described this case

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

• granting writ where state court engaged in an unreasonable application of established law, resulting in constitutional error, and error was not harmless
• noting that when the “reliability of certain facts accepted by the expert is questionable,” the court can rely on “the exercise and process of cross-examination [to] allow a [party] to bring any such factual disputes to the attention of the jury”
• “If th[e] court finds that the state court engaged in an unreasonable application of established law, resulting in constitutional error, it must next consider whether such error was harmless.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).