People v. Fredenburg

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that knowledge of the juror unanimity requirement is not constitutionally required in order for a defendant to give a knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to a jury trial
• holding it is not inappropriate for the district court to raise procedural default sua sponte
• acknowledging that “this court may consider a newly-raised default argument, if it so wishes”
• distinguishing between a variation in legal theory, which exhausts a claim, from a different legal claim
• reversing district court’s grant of habeas corpus relief but not district court’s decision to hold evidentiary hearing
• “The court is not required to address both components of Strickland if one component fails”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).