Juan H. v. Walter Allen III

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a federal habeas 14 petitioner’s Jackson claim is subject to deferential review under AEDPA
• recognizing that “unreasonable application” standard applies to insufficient evidence claim
• noting that coercion is not established where police merely indicate that a cooperative attitude would benefit a minor suspect
• explaining that the merits of the underlying claim “control the resolution of the Strickland claim”
• noting that equal protection inquiry must be in “reference to the elements of the criminal offense as set forth by state law”
• finding that “performance of 22 counsel did not fall below an ‘objective standard of reasonableness’ on account of not 23 raising [a] meritless objection” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).