Shannon Bradley v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that we review de novo “questions of law underlying the district court’s” denial of a Rule 60(b) motion (emphasis added)
• recognizing courts 20 have discretion over lawyer’s efforts to investigate and interview jurors
• noting “where an argument is available and raised by other 4 litigants (and even litigated all the way to the Supreme Court), but the [movant] did not diligently 5 pursue the argument, the change in law is ‘all the less extraordinary.’” (quoting Gonzalez, 545 6 U.S. at 537)
• “[W]e consider whether the alleged extraordinary circumstance, such as a change in the law, was material to the prisoner’s claim.”
• “[T]his change in law left untouched the law governing 15 investigating and interviewing jurors.”
• district court correctly denied a motion to interview jurors regarding racial bias when 4 the motion was based on mere speculation and lacked any specific showing of jury misconduct or 5 any other basis for good cause

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).