Russell Bryan Hadley v. Paul Caspari, 36 F.3d 51 (8th Cir. 1994). · Go Syfert
Search
Russell Bryan Hadley v. Paul Caspari, 36 F.3d 51 (8th Cir. 1994). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Stacey A. Lannert v. Patricia Jones, Superintendent of Chillicothe Correctional Center (ca8, 2003-04-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stacey A. Lannert v. Patricia Jones, Superintendent of Chillicothe Correctional Center (2×)
8th Cir. · 2003 · confidence medium
Lannert, 889 S.W.2d at 134 ; see Sweet v. Delo, 125 F.3d 1144, 1150 (8th Cir.1997) (“When a state court decides an issue on the merits despite a possible procedural default, no independent and adequate state ground bars consideration of that claim by a habeas court.” (citations omitted)); Hadley v. Caspari, 36 F.3d 51, 51 (8th Cir.1994) (“Claims presented in a habeas corpus petition will not be procedurally barred so long as the state appellate court has given ‘at least cursory consideration’ to them.” (citation omitted)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stacey A. Lannert v. Patricia Jones
8th Cir. · 2003 · confidence medium
Lannert, 889 S.W.2d at 134 ; see Sweet v. Delo, 125 F.3d 1144, 1150 (8th Cir. 1997) (“When a state court decides an issue on the merits despite a possible procedural default, no independent and adequate state ground bars consideration of that claim by a habeas court.” (citations omitted)); Hadley v. Caspari, 36 F.3d 51, 51 (8th Cir. 1994) (“Claims presented in a habeas corpus petition will not be procedurally barred so long as the state appellate court has given ‘at least cursory consideration’ to them.” (citation omitted)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Russell Bryan Hadley v. Michael Groose Paul Caspari James Purkett, Superintendent of the Farmington Correctional Center Jeremiah (Jay) W. Nixon, Attorney General, Russell Bryan Hadley v. Michael Groose Paul Caspari James Purkett, Superintendent of the Farmington Correctional Center Jeremiah (Jay) W. Nixon, Attorney General
8th Cir. · 1996 · confidence medium
Hadley v. Caspari, 36 F.3d 51, 52 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam). 6 On remand, after conducting a two-day hearing, the district court granted Hadley's petition, concluding that Maples and Johnston had been ineffective in dealing with the introduction of evidence regarding the December 15 attempted break-in.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Russell Hadley v. Michael Groose
8th Cir. · 1996 · confidence medium
Hadley v. Caspari, 36 F.3d 51, 52 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Eric Clemmons v. Paul Delo
8th Cir. · 1996 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Hadley v. Caspari, 36 F.3d 51 (8th Cir. 1994) (per curiam). -18- "dispositive finding [that petitioner had consented to the Gross deposition] does not seem to have been challenged by petitioner or counsel prior to the proceeding in this court." As we have previously noted, those who would attack a conviction are obligated to develop the material facts in the state courts. "[A] state prisoner's failure to develop material facts in state court" can be excused only if petitioner demonstrates cause for this lack of development, and prejudice resulting from it.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Eric Clemmons v. Paul Delo
8th Cir. · 1996 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Hadley v. Caspari, 36 F.3d 51 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Russell Bryan HADLEY, Appellant,
v.
Paul CASPARI, Appellee
94-1510.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Sep 28, 1994.
36 F.3d 51
Burton Newman, St. Louis, MO, argued, for appellant., Michael Joseph Spillane, Jefferson City, MO, argued (Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon and Michael J. Spillane, on the brief), for appel-lee.
Fagg, Heaney, Bowman.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Russell Bryan Hadley, an inmate at the Missouri Eastern Correctional Facility in Pacific, Missouri, filed a petition for habeas corpus relief which included claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The district court denied Hadley’s request for a full evidentiary hearing and denied his petition, finding that his ineffective assistance claims were proeedurally barred due to failure to raise them to the Missouri Court of Appeals. Hadley contends that the district court erred in finding these claims procedurally barred. We agree.

Claims presented in a habeas corpus petition will not be procedurally barred so long as the state appellate court has given “at least cursory consideration” to them. Kennedy v. Delo, 959 F.2d 112, 117 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 113 S.Ct. 168, 121 L.Ed.2d 116 (1992). The record shows that Hadley raised his ineffective assistance claims in his Rule 29.15 postconviction motion and that, on consolidated appeal, the Missouri Court of Appeals addressed the merits of these claims. The court stated:

We have evaluated the entire record, and find that it supports the motion court’s determination that Hadley’s claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel are groundless. The motion court’s conclusion that Hadley failed to sustain his burden of proving that his trial counsel was ineffective in any of the 25 claims is not clearly erroneous.

Hadley v. State, 771 S.W.2d 943, 947 (Mo.Ct.App.1989). Moreover, the court did not reach the merits simply as an alternate holding to a finding of procedural bar. Cf. Pollard v. Delo, 28 F.3d 887, 889 (8th Cir.1994) (“The Missouri Supreme Court did consider the merits of this claim, but only ‘as a matter of grace.’ ... The consideration and rejection of the claim on the merits, however, does not erase the fact that the court specifically and clearly found that the claim was procedurally barred.... ”).

[*52] Accordingly we reverse the district court and remand for an evidentiary hearing on Hadley’s claims.