Matheney v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that claims presented in previous post-conviction petitions but decided against the petitioner are barred from re-litigation by the doctrine of res judicata
• holding that the petitioner’s claim alleging trial court errors was procedurally defaulted where he made “no showing that the particular errors … were unknown in earlier review proceedings”
• determining that post-conviction counsel did not render ineffective assistance by deciding to present only the claims deemed most likely to prevail
• denying motion for DNA testing under statute imposing reasonable probability standard when results would not be more favorable to petitioner than previous testing and evidence that petitioner committed murder was “overwhelming”
• claims that have already been decided adversely are barred from re-litigation in successive post-conviction proceedings by the doctrine of res judicata
• claims of ineffective assistance of counsel already decided in earlier post-conviction appeal are barred in successive post-conviction proceedings as res judicata

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).