WALTER VEGA v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that state courts generally provide an adequate opportunity of the federal statutory and constitutional claims’”
• noting that state courts generally provide an adequate opportunity in this context “‘unless state law clearly bars the interposition of the federal statutory and constitutional claims’”
• noting that state courts generally provide an adequate opportunity in this context “‘unless state law clearly bars the interposition of the federal statutory and constitutional claims’”
• noting that state courts generally provide an adequate opportunity in this context “‘unless state law clearly bars the interposition of the federal statutory and constitutional claims’”
• stating that “state criminal proceedings are viewed as a traditional area of state concern”
• concluding district court was required to abstain under Younger when appellant alleged his pending state criminal prosecution would be tainted by his allegedly invalid waiver of his right to a jury trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).