Skip to main content
· 5/12/1994

Nathaniel James v. Robert G. Borg, Warden Attorney General of California

Citations

  • 24 F.3d 20
  • 94 Daily Journal DAR 6362
  • 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3340
  • 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 10484
  • 1994 WL 178404

How courts have described this case

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

  • “Conclusory allegations of [IAC] which are not 23 supported by a statement of specific facts do not warrant habeas relief.”
  • “Conclusory allegations which are not supported 25 by a statement of specific facts do not warrant habeas relief.”
  • “Conclusory 10 allegations which are not supported by a statement of specific facts do not warrant habeas 11 relief.”
  • “Conclusory allegations which are not supported by a statement of 13 specific facts do not warrant habeas relief.”
  • “Conclusory allegations which are not supported by a statement of specific 9 facts do not warrant habeas relief.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hug, Wiggins, Noonan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.