Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2013 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Robert Charles Comer v. Dora B. Schriro, Director, of Arizona Department of Correctionsgreen2 sentences2013See Comer v. Schriro, 480 F.3d 960, 970 (9th Cir.2007); Mason ex rel. 2013See Comer v. Schriro, 480 F.3d 960, 970 (9th Cir.2007); Mason ex rel. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kisergreen2 sentences2011Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 28, section 11(B)(1) parallels the Rees test but “is limited . . . to the unique circumstances involved when a petitioner in a capital case seeks to withdraw -37- an already-filed post-conviction petition and waive further post-conviction relief.” Reid, 197 S.W.3d at 701 n. 7; see also State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 , 244 n. 12 (Tenn. 2009). 2011Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 28, section 11(B)(1) parallels the Rees test but “is limited . . . to the unique circumstances involved when a petitioner in a capital case seeks to withdraw -37- an already-filed post-conviction petition and waive further post-conviction relief.” Reid, 197 S.W.3d at 701 n. 7; see also State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 , 244 n. 12 (Tenn. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
Lonchar v. Zantgreen2 sentences2004In Lonchar v. Zant, it was held that application of the Rees test "involves a determination of (1) whether that person suffers from a mental disease, disorder, or defect; (2) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from understanding his legal position and the options available to him; and (3) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from making a rational choice among his options." 978 F.2d 637, 641-42 (11th Cir. 1992) (citing Rumbaugh, 753 F.2d at 398 . 2004In Lonchar v. Zant, it was held that application of the Rees test "involves a determination of (1) whether that person suffers from a mental disease, disorder, or defect; (2) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from understanding his legal position and the options available to him; and (3) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from making a rational choice among his options." 978 F.2d 637, 641-42 (11th Cir. 1992) (citing Rumbaugh, 753 F.2d at 398 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Reid v. State
green
2 sentences2011Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 28, section 11(B)(1) parallels the Rees test but “is limited . . . to the unique circumstances involved when a petitioner in a capital case seeks to withdraw -37- an already-filed post-conviction petition and waive further post-conviction relief.” Reid, 197 S.W.3d at 701 n. 7; see also State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 , 244 n. 12 (Tenn. 2009). 2011Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 28, section 11(B)(1) parallels the Rees test but “is limited . . . to the unique circumstances involved when a petitioner in a capital case seeks to withdraw -37- an already-filed post-conviction petition and waive further post-conviction relief.” Reid, 197 S.W.3d at 701 n. 7; see also State v. Kiser, 284 S.W.3d 227 , 244 n. 12 (Tenn. 2009). | 2 | 2009–2011 |
Rees v. Peyton
green
2 sentences2011The court stated that the Rees standard, which contains a “rationality” component, “is limited . . . to the unique circumstances involved when a petitioner in a capital case seeks to withdraw an already-filed post-conviction petition and waive further post-conviction relief.” Id. at 701 n. 7. 2011The court stated that the Rees standard, which contains a “rationality” component, “is limited . . . to the unique circumstances involved when a petitioner in a capital case seeks to withdraw an already-filed post-conviction petition and waive further post-conviction relief.” Id. at 701 n. 7. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Rumbaugh v. Procunier
green
2 sentences2004In Lonchar v. Zant, it was held that application of the Rees test "involves a determination of (1) whether that person suffers from a mental disease, disorder, or defect; (2) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from understanding his legal position and the options available to him; and (3) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from making a rational choice among his options." 978 F.2d 637, 641-42 (11th Cir. 1992) (citing Rumbaugh, 753 F.2d at 398 . 2004In Lonchar v. Zant, it was held that application of the Rees test "involves a determination of (1) whether that person suffers from a mental disease, disorder, or defect; (2) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from understanding his legal position and the options available to him; and (3) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from making a rational choice among his options." 978 F.2d 637, 641-42 (11th Cir. 1992) (citing Rumbaugh, 753 F.2d at 398 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.