Randall Mays v. William Stephens, Director

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that no Supreme Court case has “created a rule of constitutional law making the execution of mentally ill persons unconstitutional”
• discussing how neither Atkins nor Roper “created a rule of constitutional law making the execution of mentally ill persons unconstitutional”
• “The presumption [of correctness] is especially strong when the state habeas court and the trial court are one in the same.”
• presumption of correctness afforded to state habeas court’s determination of a factual issue is especially strong when state habeas court and trial court are one in the same
• presumption of correctness afforded to state habeas court’s determination of a factual issue is especially strong when state habeas court and trial court are one in the same
• presumption of correctness afforded to state habeas court’s determination of a factual issue is especially strong when state habeas court and trial court are one in the same

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).