Scott Clabourne v. Charles Ryan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Antiterrorist and 21 Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) deference applied to the state court’s 22 “alternative holding on the merits”
• concluding that petitioner’s counsel was ineffective during capital sentencing based on three grounds, including for “fail[ing] to provide any mental health expert with health records sufficient to develop an accurate psychological profile of [petitioner].”
• holding 27 that where state court simultaneously rejected claim on procedural ground and on the merits, AEDPA deference applies to “alternative holding on the merits”
• explaining that 23 prejudice, for purpose of assessing PCR counsel’s performance, is connected to the 24 strength of the underlying ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim
• observing that prejudice showing required for ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel based on failure to raise ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim \is necessarily connected to the strength of the argument that trial counsel's assistance was ineffective\
• interpreting Detrich as reaching this conclusion based on the agreement of nine of the eleven judges in separate opinions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).