Whitney v. Horn

How courts have described this case

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

• suggesting that “if a habeas petitioner meets the Strickland test, then he/she need not also demonstrate that the error was harmful”
• stating that, in the absence of further instruction explaining the challenged language, the defect in the challenged instruction will result in a due process error
• “It is unreasonable and improper to assume that lay persons can recognize that an incorrect standard of proof has been described in a jury instruction.”
• “[T]he ultimate issue under either [the Brecht or Strickland] test reduces to determining what effect, if any, the erroneous instruction had on the jury’s verdict.”
• “It is now clear that this one-year limitation is a jurisdictional rule that precludes consideration of the merits of any untimely PCRA petition . . . .”
• Petitioner “must establish that trial counsel’s stewardship fell below an object standard of reasonableness”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).