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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 8 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Antone v. Dugger.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Antone v. Dugger Anchor | green | “was appointed when execution was imminent and therefore did not have time fully to familiarize himself with the case.” | 4 |
| 2 | Jimmy Neuschafer v. Harol Whitley Attorney General for the State of Nevada, Respondents | green | “when a petitioner has ample time to seek collateral relief but inexplicably waits until the eve of execution to do so, he should not be heard to complain that time constraints prevented his counsel from identifying and exhausting all claims in time to include them in a single fe…” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.