Robert A. Buell v. Betty Mitchell, Warden

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “a petitioner cannot circumvent the exhaustion requirement by failing to comply with state procedural rules” (quoting Coleman v. Mitchell, 244 F.3d 533, 538 (6th Cir. 2001))
• observing that “[electrocution has yet to be found cruel and unusual punishment by any American court” and stating that “[w]e decline to be the first”
• observing that \[e]lectrocution has yet to be found cruel and unusual punishment by any American court\ and stating that \[w]e decline to be the first\
• upholding similar, but more limited, instruction against challenge that mitigating factors were not appropriately defined
• denying habeas relief where the trial court gave a jury instruction very similar to the one at issue in the instant case
• denying habeas relief where the trial court gave a jury instruction very similar to the one at issue in the instant case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).