Matter of Steven OO. v. Amber PP.

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 claim is “technically” exhausted if “a state procedural rule would bar consideration if the claim was later presented to the state court”
• holding that exhaustion requirement is “technically met when exhaustion is unconditionally waived by the state”
• stating that a claim is “technically” exhausted if “a state procedural rule would bar consideration if the claim was later presented to the state court”
• finding no prejudice where defendant did not show witness's testimony would have differed
• finding no prejudice where defendant did not show witness’s testimony would have differed
• claim is “technically” exhausted if “a state procedural rule would bar consideration of the claim [if it] was later presented to the state court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).