green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
11.1 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2002 ·
…he fact that one court or even a few courts have applied the precedent in the same manner to close facts does not make the state court decision 'reasonable.
⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2002 ·
…he fact that one court or even a few courts have applied the precedent in the same manner to close facts does not make the state court decision reasonable.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
McCambridge v. Hall
(4×)
he fact that one court or even a few courts have applied the precedent in the same manner to close facts does not make the state court decision 'reasonable.
discussed
Cited "see"
Stuber v. Hill
(2×)
Our review of the record on this argument leads us to conclude that, for substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s Memorandum and Order, dated October 26, 2001, appellant has not demonstrated that the state appellate court’s decision on this issue was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” or was “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(l)-(2); see Valdez v. W…
discussed
Cited "see"
Hooker v. Mullin
(2×)
See Valdez v. Ward, 219 F.3d 1222, 1242 (10th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 979 , 121 S.Ct. 1618 , 149 L.Ed.2d 481 (2001). 6 Under Oklahoma law, a person commits first degree heat of passion manslaughter if the homicide is “perpetrated without a design to effect death, and in a heat of passion, but in a cruel and unusual manner, or by means of a dangerous weapon; unless it is committed under such circumstances as constitute excusable or justifiable homicide.” Okla.
discussed
Cited "see"
Janke v. Novac
(2×)
See Valdez v. Ward, 219 F.3d 1222, 1231 (10th Cir.2000) (applying AEDPA to evaluate whether petitioner waived Miranda rights), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 979 , 121 S.Ct. 1618 , 149 L.Ed.2d 481 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Romano v. Gibson
(2×)
See Valdez v. Ward, 219 F.3d 1222, 1230 (10th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 979 , 121 S.Ct. 1618 , 149 L.Ed.2d 481 (2001); see also Smith v. Massey, 235 F.3d 1259, 1275 (10th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 235 , 151 L.Ed.2d 169 (2001), abrogated on other grounds by Neill v. Gibson, 278 F.3d 1044 , 1057 n. 5 (10th Cir.2001).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Harlan
v.
Colorado
v.
Colorado
No. 00-8519.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 16, 2001.
Published
Citer courts: First Circuit (4)
Sup. Ct. Colo. Certiorari denied.