discussed Cited "see" Robertson v. State (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g." See Tucker v. Catoe, 221 F.3d 600, 604-05 (4th Cir. 2000) (evaluating the State's failure to comply with section 17-27-160 and stating, "We accordingly conclude that a state must not only enact a 'mechanism' and standards for post-conviction review counsel, but those mechanisms and standards must in fact be complied with before the state may invoke the time limitations of U.S.C. § 2263" (emphasis added)).16 Nevertheless, a PCR applicant would still maintain the significant burden of proving that he was prejudiced by counsel's lack of qualification. 15 See also Tucker v. Moore, 56 F. Supp. 2d …

discussed Cited "see" Dennis Skillicorn v. Al Luebbers See Tucker v. Catoe, 221 F.3d 600 , 604 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1054 , 121 S.Ct. 661 , 148 L.Ed.2d 563 (2000); Ashmus v. Woodford, 202 F.3d 1160, 1165 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 916 , 121 S.Ct. 274 , 148 L.Ed.2d 199 (2000).