green
Positive treatment
3.2 score
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Healy v. Spencer
See Hurtado v. Tucker, 245 F.3d 7, 17 (1st Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 925 , 122 S.Ct. 282 , 151 L.Ed.2d 208 (2001) (noting that the Terry Williams Court found the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision objectively unreasonable based upon its “failure éven to mention the defendant’s sole argument in mitigation”).
cited
Cited "see"
O'BRIEN v. Marshall
See Hurtado v. Tucker, 245 F.3d 7, 15-16 (1st Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 925 , 122 S.Ct. 282 , 151 L.Ed.2d 208 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ouber v. Guarino
See Bui v. DiPaolo, 170 F.3d 232, 243-44 (1st Cir.1999) (stating that “state courts are not required to supply the specific reasons that a federal court thinks are most persuasive for upholding the judgment”), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1086 , 120 S.Ct. 1717 , 146 L.Ed.2d 640 (2000); accord Hurtado v. Tucker, 245 F.3d 7, 19 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 282 , 151 L.Ed.2d 208 (2001); O’Brien, 145 F.3d at 25 .
cited
Cited "see"
DiBenedetto v. Hall
See Hurtado v. Tucker, 245 F.3d 7, 20 (1st Cir.), cert. denied — U.S. —, 122 S.Ct. 282 , — L.Ed.2d — (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sok v. Spencer
Sok complains at length that the Appeals Court's analysis was inadequate because it "did not engage in any independent analysis of what took place at the Motion to Suppress hearing.” (#21 at 20) However, in determining whether a state court's application of federal law was "unreasonable,” a habeas court “do[es] not focus on the quality of the court's reasoning but rather on the reasonableness of the outcome." Ellen v. Brady, 475 F.3d 5, 9 (1st Cir.2007); see also Hurtado v. Tucker, 245 F.3d 7, 20 (1st Cir.) ("The ultimate question on habeas ... is not how well reasoned the state court de…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Campiti v. Matesanz
See also Hurtado v. Tucker, 245 F.3d 7, 18 (1st Cir.2001) (noting that “claims that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict are often made, but rarely successful.”) (quotation omitted), cert. denied — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 282 , 151 L.Ed.2d 208 (2001).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Scott P. LOWELL
v.
UNITED STATES
v.
UNITED STATES
No. 01-5476.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 2001.
Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.