Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Sixth Circuit· 8/10/2007

Richey v. Bradshaw

Citations

  • 498 F.3d 344
  • 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 18983
  • 2007 WL 2287741

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the state waived its objection to the court’s reliance on new evidence where (1) the state urged the district court to consider the evidence, (2
  • stating that “the only way” Richey could have shown the constitutional infirmity “required evidence outside the record”
  • finding that an expert was necessary to make an informed decision about trial strategy
  • noting that our court has “declined to observe Ohio’s procedural bar and instead [has] proceeded to the merits of an ineffective-assistance claim when we have concluded that Ohio improperly invoked its res judicata rule”
  • explaining that counsel did not exhibit the “most egregious type” of ineffective assistance of counsel “wherein lawyers altogether fail to hire an expert” but holding that counsel was nonetheless ineffective for failing to properly investigate the state’s arson expert
  • declining to find procedural default where procedural bar was improperly enforced by state courts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Siler, Daughtrey, Cole

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Richey v. Bradshaw

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.