Ronald James Brewer v. James Hall, 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 habeas petitioner’s reliance on Symington was “misplaced” because “Symington is not a Supreme Court case” and because Symington⅛ analysis was based on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure rather than the Sixth Amendment
• holding that a habeas petitioner’s reliance on Symington was “misplaced” because “Symington is not a Supreme Court case” and because Symington’s análysis was based on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure rather than the Sixth Amendment
• holding that a habeas petitioner’s reliance on Symington was “misplaced” because “Symington is not a Supreme Court case” and because Symington’s analysis was based on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure rather than the Sixth Amendment
• holding that a habeas petitioner’s reliance on Symington was “misplaced” because “Symington is not a Supreme Court case” and because Symington’s analysis was based on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure rather than the Sixth Amendment
• ruling that 28 if there is no Supreme Court precedent creating clearly established federal law on the legal 1 issue raised by a defendant in state court, the state court’s decision cannot be contrary to 2 or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law
• affirming the denial of a habeas petition under AEDPA for lack of clearly established Supreme Court precedent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).