Harrington v. Richter

Supreme Court

Harrington v. Richter

176 L. Ed. 2d 108, 130 S. Ct. 1506, 559 U.S. 935, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1449, 78 U.S.L.W. 3479

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided February 22, 2010·No. No. 09-587·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted. In addition to the question presented, parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: “Does AEDPA deference apply to a state court’s summary disposition of a claim, including a claim under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 [104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674] (1984)?”

Same case below, 578 F.3d 944.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted. In addition to the question presented, parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: “Does AEDPA deference apply to a state court’s summary disposition of a claim, including a claim under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 [104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674] (1984)?”

Same case below, 578 F.3d 944.

Harrington v. Richter, 176 L. Ed. 2d 108, 130 S. Ct. 1506, 559 U.S. 935, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1449, 78 U.S.L.W. 3479 (U.S. 2010).

Pincite

176 L. Ed. 2d 108 (Harrington v. Richter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related