Legal Opinion · Dissent

Doody v. Ryan

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 4, 2011No. 06-17161Published

1Dissent

TALLMAN, Circuit Judge, with whom Judges RYMER and KLEINFELD join,

dissenting:

The Supreme Court has repeatedly told us to adhere to the highly deferential standard of review of state court judgments that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), requires in federal habeas cases. But my colleagues continue to treat this case as if it were on direct appeal to be reviewed de novo. The majority will not yield to the shot across our bow fired by the Supreme Court when it granted Arizona’s petition for certiorari and vacated and remanded our original en banc…

2Cases cited59 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  5. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API