Loggins v. Thomas

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “if some fairminded jurists could agree with the state court’s decision, although others might disagree, federal habeas relief must be denied”
• noting that when “relief is due to be denied even if claims are not procedurally barred, [a court] can skip over the procedural bar issues” and deny the claim on its merits.
• applying 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) and noting that implications and dicta cannot “clearly establish federal law”
• explaining, post-Richter, that “[o]ur case law also makes clear that we accord AEDPA deference not only to the adjudications of state appellate courts but also to those of state trial courts that have not been overturned on appeal”
• explaining, post-Richter, that “[o]ur case law also makes clear that we accord AEDPA deference not only to the adjudications of state appellate courts but also to those of state trial courts that have not been overturned 41 Case: 14-10681 Date Filed: 08/23/2016 Page: 42 of 92 on appeal”
• “[I]f some fairminded jurists could agree with the state court’s decision, although others might disagree, federal habeas relief must be denied.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).