discussed Cited "see" Holland v. Donnelly See Green v. Scully, 850 F.2d 894, 902-04 (2d Cir.1988). *236 Finally, Holland argues in the alternative that this is not merely a case of “unreasonable application of’ Supreme Court precedent, but one in which the state court’s decision was directly “contrary to” a Supreme Court decision, specifically, Reeves v. Alabama, 348 U.S. 891 , 75 S.Ct. 214 , 99 L.Ed. 700 (1954).

discussed Cited "see" Ex Parte Aaron (2×) See Reeves v. State, 260 Ala. 66 , 68 So.2d 14 , reversed 348 U.S. 891 , 75 S.Ct. 214 , 99 L.Ed. 700 .

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Callahan v. State Situations which might give rise to such questioning include cases where the trial judge knows he is likely to be a material witness, Canon 3.C.(1)(d)(iii); see also, Reeves v. State , 260 Ala. 66 , 68 So.2d 14 (1953), reversed on other grounds, 348 U.S. 891 , 75 S.Ct. 214 , 99 L.Ed. 700 (1954); Malone v. State , 46 Ala. App. 363 , 242 So.2d 409 , cert. denied, 286 Ala. 736 , 242 So.2d 410 (1970), or where he has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts.