Michael T. Cooper-Smith v. Joan Palmateer

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2) 21 which apply to evidentiary hearings also apply to expansion of the record under Rule 7 of 22 the habeas rules
• stating that a petitioner “must comply with § 2254(e)(2) in order to expand the record under Rule 7”
• affirming denial of federal habeas relief where de novo review of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim showed that the conduct did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation
• “The failure to investigate or develop a claim given knowledge of the information upon which the claim is based, is not the exercise of diligence.”
• “[Petitioner] 11 must comply with § 2254(e)(2) in order to expand the record under Rule 7.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).