Legal Opinion
Cox v. Howerton
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided March 19, 2012No. S11A1411PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BENHAM, Justice.
This appeal returns to us following our grant in 2010 of appellant Holly Cox’s pro se application for a certificate of probable cause and our remand of the case to the habeas court with direction “to analyze and make appropriate findings and legal conclusions regarding the prejudice prong of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel.” See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U. S. 668 (104 SC 2052, 80 LE2d 674) (1984). On remand, the habeas court concluded that Cox did not satisfy the prejudice prong and denied relief. We again granted Cox’s pro se application for a certificate…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Rakestrau v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2005
- Smith v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- EVELYN v. the STATE.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2018
- Alexander v. the StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2017
- Cox v. HowertonSupreme Court of Georgia · 2012
- Lisheena Cantrell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2021