Mendez v. Knowles

How courts have described this case

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

• distinguishing Drope based, in part, on the “finding of the court-appointed expert that Mendez was competent to stand trial”
• distinguishing Gibson where “several instructions regarding the beyond a reasonable doubt standard were read to the jury after the jury was given the preponderance of the evidence instruction”
• denying habeas relief because there was “no 2 reasonable likelihood the jury applied the wrong burden of proof”
• rejecting argument that an alleged deprivation of a 7 “liberty interest” violated federal due process where the state courts complied with its own 8 state-law procedures
• stating the standard for expanding a certificate of appealability
• applying the Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. test

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).