Nazzaro Scarpa v. Larry E. Dubois, Etc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant alleging ineffective assistance of counsel carries burden of persuasion on both prongs of Strickland
• holding that a petitioner who consistently asserted an ineffective assistance of counsel claim had satisfied the exhaustion requirement even though his ALOFAR did not specifically refer to the federal Constitution or federal cases
• noting that “bad lawyering, regardless of how bad, does not support the per se presumption” (quotation omitted)
• stating that “attorney error, even when egregious, will almost always require analysis under Strickland’s prejudice prong”
• implying that a deficient reasonable doubt instruction is prejudicial within the meaning of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)
• explaining that federal courts, although respecting state courts' findings of historical fact, traditionally afford de novo review in regard to ultimate questions presented by state prisoners' habeas petitions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).