Kemp, Warden v. Blake, 474 U.S. 998 (1985). · Go Syfert
Search
Kemp, Warden v. Blake, 474 U.S. 998 (1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1989 · …it should be beyond cavil that an attorney who fails altogether to make any preparations for the penalty phase of a capital murder trial deprives his client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel by any objective standard of reasonableness. ⚠ not in text
104 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 27 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Harris v. Dugger (ca11, 1989-05-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 17 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Harris v. Dugger
11th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
it should be beyond cavil that an attorney who fails altogether to make any preparations for the penalty phase of a capital murder trial deprives his client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel by any objective standard of reasonableness.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Harris v. Dugger
11th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
it should be beyond cavil that an attorney who fails altogether to make any preparations for the penalty phase of a capital murder trial deprives his client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel by any objective standard of reasonableness.
cited Cited "see" West, Damon
Tex. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 535 (11 th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
cited Cited "see" Kirksey v. State
Nev. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 533 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" Robert A. Brecheen v. Dan Reynolds, Warden of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary (2×)
10th Cir. · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 533 (11th Cir.) ("It should be beyond cavil that an attorney who fails altogether to make any preparations for the penalty phase of a capital murder trial deprives his client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel by any objective standard of reasonableness."), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985). 94 We therefore conclude the district court's findings of adequate investigation and preparation are adequately supported by the state court record.
cited Cited "see" Shirley Burton, and Cross-Appellant v. Sharon Johnson, and Cross-Appellee. Shirley Burton v. Sharon Johnson, Thomas Rutledge, District Attorney, Fifth Judicial District of New Mexico, Carlsbad, N.M. Vernon Henning, Assistant District Attorney, Fifth Judicial District of New Mexico, Roswell, N.M. Attorney General of the State of New Mexico the State of New Mexico
5th Cir. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 525 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
cited Cited "see" Burton v. Johnson
10th Cir. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 525 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Sullivan
La. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 533 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985) (attorney who fails to make preparation for penalty phase deprives client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel).
discussed Cited "see" Martinez-Macias v. Collins
W.D. Tex. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 533 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985) (attorney did not prepare for the sentencing phase because he thought his client would be found not guilty of first degree murder by reason of insanity). 72 .
discussed Cited "see" Omar Blanco, Cross-Appellant v. Harry K. Singletary, as Secretary, Department of Corrections, State of Florida, Cross-Appellee
11th Cir. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 533 (11th Cir.) ("It should be beyond cavil that an attorney who fails altogether to make aay preparations for the penalty phase of a capital murder trial deprives his client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel by any objective standard of reasonableness."), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985); cf. Harris v. Dugger, 874 F.2d 756, 763 (11th Cir.) ("[PJrior to the day of sentencing, neither lawyer had investigated Harris’ family, scholastic, military and employment background, leading to their total — and admitted — …
discussed Cited "see" William Alvin Smith, Cross-Appellee v. Walter Zant, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Cross-Appellant (2×)
11th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 535 (11th Cir.) (Tjoflat, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
cited Cited "see" Mathis v. Zant
N.D. Ga. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 534-35 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" Presnell v. Kemp (2×)
11th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 546 (11th Cir.) (Tjoflat, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" Presnell v. Kemp (2×)
11th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 546 (11th Cir.) (Tjoflat, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Willie Clisby, Cross-Appellant v. Charlie Jones, Warden, Holman Unit, Alabama Department of Corrections, Cross-Appellee (2×)
11th Cir. · 1992 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 540-42 (11th Cir.) (Tjoflat, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985). .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Anthony Bertolotti v. Richard Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (2×)
11th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523 , (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985); Magill, 824 F.2d 879 ; Stephens v. Kemp, 846 F.2d, 642 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 109 S.Ct. 189 , 102 L.Ed.2d 158 (1988).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Harris v. State
Fla. · 1988 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Blake v. Kemp, 758 F.2d 523, 533 (11th Cir.1985) ("It should be beyond cavil that an attorney who fails altogether to make any preparations for the penalty phase of a capital murder trial deprives his client of reasonably effective assistance of counsel by any objective standard of reasonableness"), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 998 , 106 S.Ct. 374 , 88 L.Ed.2d 367 (1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ralph Kemp, Warden
v.
Joseph James Blake
85-188.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 18, 1985.
474 U.S. 998
White.
Cited by 87 opinions  |  Published
1 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 77%
Citer courts: Eleventh Circuit (2)
Reporter's Syllabus — editorial summary, not part of the Court's opinion

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

Justice WHITE, dissenting.

Lead Opinion

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Dissent

Justice White,

dissenting.

This case presents the question whether, in a habeas corpus proceeding presenting multiple claims for relief, an appellate court has jurisdiction to review an order of the district court without disposing of all of petitioner’s claims. In his habeas petition to[*999] the District Court, respondent presented 59 constitutional claims. The District Court found that three of these claims had merit and granted the writ, but expressly refused to rule on the remaining claims. Blake v. Zant, 513 F. Supp. 772 (SD Ga. 1981). On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit originally held that, because the District Court’s order did not finally determine all of the claims presented in the habeas petition, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b),[1] there was no final judgment, and therefore, the court was without jurisdiction to consider the appeal under 28 U. S. C. § 1291.[2] Blake v. Zant, 737 F. 2d 925, 928 (1984). On sua sponte reconsideration, however, the court determined that a district court order granting a writ of habeas corpus is a final judgment within the meaning of § 1291, regardless of the district court’s refusal to consider the remainder of petitioner’s claims. 758 F. 2d 523, 524-525 (1985).

This later decision of the Eleventh Circuit conflicts with the practice of the Eighth Circuit. That court has held that, when a district court grants habeas relief to a petitioner on some but not all of the claims presented for consideration, the court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to review the trial court’s decision unless its order also finally disposes of the remainder of petitioner’s claims. Stewart v. Bishop, 403 F. 2d 674, 679-680 (1968). See also Gray v. Swenson, 430 F. 2d 9, 11 (CA8 1970) (Rule 54(b) applies to prohibit appeals when fewer than all habeas claims are[*1000] finally determined by the district court’s order, but finding all claims to have been decided). Given this direct conflict among the Courts of Appeals, I would grant certiorari in this case.

1

Rule 54(b) provides as follows:

“(b) Judgment Upon Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Parties. When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for entry of judgment. In the absence of such determination and direction, any order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims or parties, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties.”

2

Section 1291 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

“The courts of appeals . . . shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States . . . .”