green
Positive treatment
3.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Studebaker v. Uribe
Where the alleged error is the failure to give an instruction, the burden on the petitioner is “especially heavy.” Henderson, 431 U.S. at 155 , 97 S.Ct. at 1737 ; accord Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616, 624 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gomez v. Adams
Moreover, where the alleged error is the failure to give an instruction, the burden on the petitioner is “especially heavy.” Henderson, 431 U.S. at 155 , 97 S.Ct. 1730 ; accord Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616, 624 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998); see also Duckett v. Godinez, 67 F.3d 734, 746 (9th Cir.1995) (“Wé ask whether, under the instructions as a whole and given the evidence in the case, the failure to give the requested instruction rendered the trial so fundamentally unfair as to violate federal due process.”), cert. deni…
cited
Cited "see"
Bobby Henry v. Peggy Kernan, Warden Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General
See Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616, 626 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998); Collazo v. Estelle, 940 F.2d 411, 416 (9th Cir.1991) (en banc).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dearstyne v. Mazzuca
See also Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616 , 632 n. 7 (9th Cir.1997) (claim that petitioner was denied due process in state habeas proceeding is “not addressable in a section 2254 proceeding’’), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998); Montgomery v. Meloy, 90 F.3d 1200, 1206 (7th Cir.1996) (per curiam) (“Unless state collateral review violates some independent constitutional right, such as the Equal Protection Clause, ... errors in state collateral review cannot form the basis for federal habeas corpus relief.”), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 907 , 117 S.Ct. …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Corchado v. Rabideau
See also Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616 , 632 n. 7 (9th Cir.1997) (claim that petitioner was denied due process in state habeas proceeding is "not addressable in a section 2254 proceeding”), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998); Montgomery v. Meloy, 90 F.3d 1200, 1206 (7th Cir.1996) (per curiam) ("Unless state collateral review violates some independent constitutional right, such as the Equal Protection Clause, ... errors in state collateral review cannot form the basis for federal habeas corpus relief.”), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 907 , 117 S.Ct. 266 , 1…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Davis v. Felker
Where the alleged error is the failure to give an instruction, the burden on the petitioner is “especially heavy” because “[a]n omission, or an incomplete instruction, is less likely to be prejudicial than a misstatement of the law.” Henderson v. Kibbe, 431 U.S. 145, 155 , 97 S.Ct. 1730 , 52 L.Ed.2d 203 (1977); see also Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616, 624 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998). 3.
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Abshier v. State
(4×)
See, e.g., Mollett v. State, 1997 OK CR 28, ¶ 41 , 939 P.2d 1, 11 , cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 859 , 139 L.Ed.2d 758 (1998); McCracken v. State, 1994 OK CR 68 , 887 P.2d 323, 334 , cert. denied, 516 U.S. 859 , 116 S.Ct. 166 , 133 L.Ed.2d 108 (1995). ¶ 169 The United States Supreme Court has recognized that where the defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and state law prohibits the defendant's release on parole, due process requires that the sentencing jury be informed that the defendant is parole ineligible.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Samson Dubria v. G.A. Smith, Warden
Due Process To show that his due process rights were violated, Dubria must demonstrate that the erroneous admission of the unedited tape and transcript of the interview “so fatally infected the proceedings as to render them fundamentally unfair.” Jammal v. Van de Kamp, 926 F.2d 918, 919 (9th Cir. 1991); see also Villafuerte v. Stewart, 111 F.3d 616, 627 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1079 , 118 S.Ct. 860 , 139 L.Ed.2d 759 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Salazar v. State
(2×)
See also Mollett v. State, 1997 OK CR 28 , 939 P.2d 1, 12-13 , cert. denied, — U.S. —, 118 S.Ct. 859 , 139 L.Ed.2d 758 (1998).
Prewitt
v.
Alexander
v.
Alexander
No. 97-6695.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 20, 1998.
Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.