Metrish v. Lancaster

Oral argument

• Argued

  59 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the Michigan Supreme Court’s retroactive abrogation of the defense of diminished capacity did not entitle the petitioner to federal habeas corpus relief
• explaining that success in a habeas case premised on § 2254(d)(1
• explaining that success in a habeas case premised on § 2254(d)(1
• explaining that success in a habeas case premised on § 2254(d)(1) requires the petitioner to \show that the challenged state-court ruling rested on 'an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement' \
• explaining that success in a habeas case premised on § 2254(d)(1) requires the petitioner to “show that the challenged state-court ruling rested on ‘an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.’ ”
• explaining that success in a habeas case premised on Section 2254(d)(1) requires the petitioner to \show that the challenged state-court ruling rested on 'an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement'\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).