Ponnapula v. Spitzer

How courts have described this case

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

• nothing that a petitioner “bears a very heavy burden in convincing a federal habeas court to grant a petition on the grounds of insufficient evidence”
• cautioning against fashioning “every nuance of state law ... into a [legal insufficiency] problem, thereby transforming federal habeas courts into super-appellate state courts,” a role which “[b]oth Congress and the Supreme Court prohibit for federal habeas courts”
• “[W]e review the evidence in the light most favorable to the State . . . .”
• “[W]e review the evidence in the light most favorable to the State . . . .”
• “[W]e review the evidence in the light most favorable to the State[.]”
• “[The court] review[s] the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and the applicant is entitled to habeas corpus relief only if no rational trier of fact could find proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence adduced at trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).