Legal Opinion
Rogers v. Whitley
District Court, D. Nevada
Decided November 21, 1988No. CV-N-87-505-ECRPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
EDWARD C. REED, Jr., Chief Judge.. The issue before this Court is whether the seventh ground of Rogers’ petition for writ of federal habeas corpus has been exhausted as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). This ground asserts that Rogers’ conviction for first-degree murder and subsequent death sentence were constitutionally infirm because “Nevada’s *758M’Naghten Rule is an inappropriate and improper test for determining criminal responsibility.” Rogers’ Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus at 15 (filed Oct. 26, 1987). Upon further briefing of the exhaustion issue, Rogers’ appointed counsel has…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Picard v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Schwartzmiller v. GardnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Ionatana Tamapua v. Edwin Shimoda and the Attorney General of the State of Hawaii, RespondentsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Jimmy Neuschafer v. Harol Whitley Attorney General for the State of Nevada, RespondentsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rogers v. WhitleyDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1989
- Rogers v. McDanielDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2011