Garuti v. Roden
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
DYK, Circuit Judge.
In this habeas appeal, petitioner Joseph M. Garuti argues that the district court erred in dismissing his petition without an evidentiary hearing. Garuti argues that, inter alia, he was entitled to a hearing on his Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance of counsel claims under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Because Garuti cannot demonstrate that he has raised a substantial issue that would require additional factual development, we affirm.
I
On March 14, 2006, Garuti was convicted in Massachusetts Superior Court of first degree…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Harvinder Singh v. American Honda Finance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Christopher Taft Landers v. WardenCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2015
- Kervinton Valentino v. Harold ClarkeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2020
- Akara v. RyanDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2017
- (PC) Crain v. State of CaliforniaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.