Joseph Eckstein v. Phil Kingston, 1

How courts have described this case

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

• holding state-court no-prejudice decision was reasonable despite counsel’s failure to impeach a witness with evidence of her mental illness where “overwhelming evidence corroborated” her testimony
• noting that the \alleged error” that petitioner sought to bring to the court’s attention through supplementation of the record \had no chance of affecting the outcome”
• explaining that state court had reasonably applied Strickland in holding that counsel’s failure to impeach witness’s credibility was not prejudicial where two recorded conversations irrefutably established that defendant had hired man to kill his wife
• “We review the decision not to expand the record for an abuse of discretion.”
• applying Rule 7(a) of Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).