Smallwood v. Gibson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, although State bears ultimate burden of proof, habeas petitioner has burden to set forth specific allegations challenging state bar's adequacy, once State pleads that affirmative defense
• holding that state court’s decision was reasonable when “none of the prosecutor’s comments were of sufficient magnitude to influence the jury’s decision”
• holding that state court’s decision was reasonable when “none of the prosecutor’s comments were of sufficient magnitude to influence the jury’s decision”
• holding that photographs did not render proceedings fundamentally unfair in light of their probative nature, the nature of the crime, and evidence of the defendant’s guilt
• holding that because there was direct evidence the petitioner committed the crime for which he was convicted, admission of prior bad acts did not make the trial “fundamentally unfair”
• holding that an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim was not exhausted when petitioner “raised an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal [but] based it on different reasons than those expressed in his habeas petition’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).