discussed Cited as authority (rule) Foster v. Chatman See Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U. S. 327, 335 (2007) (“[T]his Court rarely grants review at this stage of the litigation even when the application for state collateral relief is supported by argu- ably meritorious federal constitutional claims, choosing instead to wait for federal habeas proceedings” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Kyles v. Whitley, 498 U. S. 931, 932 (1990) (Stevens, J., concurring in denial of stay of execution); Huffman v. Florida, 435 U. S. 1014 , 1017–1018 (1978) (Stevens, J., respecting denial of certiorari).

examined Cited as authority (rule) Lawrence v. Florida (3×) also: Cited "see" As Justice Stevens has noted, “this Court rarely grants review at this stage of the litigation even when the application for state collateral relief is supported by arguably meritorious federal constitutional claims,” choosing instead to wait for “federal habeas proceedings.” Kyles v. Whitley, 498 U. S. 931, 932 (1990) (opinion concurring in denial of stay of execution).

discussed Cited "see" Garcia v. Spearman See generally Kyles 14 v. Whitley, 498 U.S. 931, 932 (1990) (Stevens, J., concurring in order denying stay of execution) 15 (citing Case for the proposition that “the scope of the State's obligation to provide collateral 16 review is shrouded in so much uncertainty”); Huffman v. Florida, 435 U.S. 1014, 1017 (1978) 17 (Stevens, J., concurring in denial of certiorari) (citing Case in support of proposition that, although 18 summary reversal may have been appropriate on direct review of the conviction, and although the 19 petitioner may succeed in a federal habeas petition, it “does not fol…