William D. Wickline v. Betty Mitchell, Warden

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the three-judge panel would not likely have been misled by any improper evidence
• holding that the three-judge panel would not likely have been misled by any improper evidence
• holding that the state court reasonably concluded that the mitigating value of evidence about the defendant’s mental health, good behavior, and troubled background was insufficient to establish prejudice
• holding that the state court reasonably concluded that the mitigating value of evidence about the defendant's mental health, good behavior, and troubled background was insufficient to establish prejudice
• holding that the three-judge panel would not likely have been misled by improper evidence
• finding that the petitioner’s ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims were procedurally defaulted because he failed to comply with the rule set forth in Murnahan

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).