Ouber v. Guarino

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that \it is helpful to examine precedents from lower federal courts to determine how the general standard applies to a particular set of facts\
• explaining that, under the AEDPA, “the state court’s factual findings are entitled to a presumption of correctness that can be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary”
• stating that such reference is particularly appropriate in ineffective assistance of counsel cases, which are highly fact-specific
• noting that opinions of the inferior federal courts are relevant in assessing the reasonableness of a state court’s treatment of a contested issue
• explaining that trial counsel is “under no obligation to make an opening statement at all”
• observing that no one had “managed to identify any benefit to be derived” from counsel’s change of approach, which created doubt as to whether it was “part and parcel of a reasoned strategy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).