Legal Opinion
James H. Hinkle, Petitioner-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Michael Randle, Warden, Respondent-Appellant/cross-Appellee
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided October 11, 2001No. 00-3506, 00-3889PublishedCited by 249 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Petitioner filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus on the grounds that the prosecutor committed misconduct during closing arguments to the jury and that his counsel’s performance was constitutionally ineffective because he failed to object during the prosecutor’s closing argument. Finding merit to the prosecutorial misconduct claim, the district court granted the writ on the condition that the State of Ohio retry Petitioner within ninety days. Respondent timely filed a notice of appeal and filed a motion for a stay of the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Murray v. CarrierSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by249 opinions
- Willie Williams, Jr. v. Margaret Bagley, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Maurice A. Mason v. Betty MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- Cargle v. MullinCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Kenneth Biros, Petitioner-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Margaret Bagley, Warden, Respondent-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Richard Nields v. Margaret Bradshaw, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
244 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.