Snowden v. Singletary

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an expert witness’s testimony bolstering the credibility of a child victim was improper and denied the defendant due process
• holding that to fully exhaust state reme- dies, the petitioner must “make the state court aware that the claims asserted present federal constitutional issues”
• stating that unexhausted claims that “would be procedurally barred in state court due to a state-law procedural default” provide no basis for federal habeas relief
• stating that unexhausted claims that “would be procedurally barred in state court due to a state-law procedural default” provide no basis for federal habeas relief
• stating that unexhausted claims that “would be procedurally barred in state court due to a state-law procedural default” provide no basis for federal habeas relief
• stating that unexhausted claims that “would be procedurally barred in state court due to a state-law procedural default” provide no basis for federal habeas relief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).