Rokita, M., Aplt. v. DOC

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 postconviction petitioner was entitled to a procedural right under a statute that was later amended because the duly enacted statute conferred a vested right
• declining to review determination by state habeas court of validity of Texas statute under Texas constitution in context of Strickland claim
• “As a federal habeas court, we are bound by the state habeas court’s factual findings, both implicit and explicit.”
• “As a federal habeas court, we are bound by the state habeas court’s factual findings, both implicit and explicit.”
• “As a federal habeas court, we are bound by the state habeas court’s factual findings, both implicit and explicit.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).