Rodney Reed 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.

• holding that Martinez “also extends to Sixth Amendment claims of appellate-counsel [ineffective assistance]”
• declining petitioner’s suggestion that the Court not apply § 2254(e)(1)’s presumption of correctness to the CCA’s review of his actual innocence claim under Schlup
• affirming the district court's application of § 2254(e)(1)'s deference standard to the state court's findings of fact with regard to the petitioner's actual innocence claim
• declining petitioner’s suggestion that the Court not apply section 2254(e)(1)’s presumption of correctness to the Court of Criminal Appeals’ review of his actual innocence claim under Schlup
• declining petitioner’s suggestion that the Court not apply section 2254(e)(1)’s presumption of correctness to the Court of Criminal Appeals’ review of his actual innocence claim under Schlup v. Delo, 53 U.S. 298 (1995)
• declining petitioner’s suggestion that the Court not apply section 2254(e)(1)’s presumption of correctness to the Court of Criminal Appeals’ review of his actual innocence claim under Schlup v. Delo, 53 U.S. 298 (1995)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).