Randy J. Lechner v. Matthew J. Frank, Secretary

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding, on a habeas appeal, that resentencing was not necessary when there was “no indication in the record that the [sentencing] court founded its sentence at least in part on” the unsupported facts
• stating that “[f]ederal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law” and that “[v]iolations of state laws are cognizable only if they resulted in fundamental unfairness and consequently violate a petitioner's constitutional rights”
• sentencing court’s mere mention of information does not show that the court relied on that information to sentence the defendant
• “Federal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law . . . . (citing Lewis v. Jeffers, 497 U.S. 764, 780 (1990)
• “Federal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law[.]”
• “Federal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law.” (citing Lewis v. Jeffers, 497 U.S. 764, 780 (1990)). Burnette’s claims regarding spousal privilege, see Schmidt v. Foster, No. 18- CV-29, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144900, at (E.D. Wis. Aug. 26, 2019

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).