Legal Opinion
Millio v. Barkley
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided April 22, 1999No. 1:97-cv-00557PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION & ORDER
HECKMAN, United States Magistrate ■ Judge.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the parties to this case have consented to have the undersigned conduct all proceedings, including entry of final judgment (Item 8). Petitioner has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. For the reasons set forth below, the petition is denied.
BACKGROUND
In an effort to save money for their retirement, Arthur and Charlotte Taylor supplement their income by selling diamonds and jewelry from their home (Tr. at 39). On August 13, 1992, at…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Coppedge v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. PizzoniaDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2006
- Akosa v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2002
- Lalonde v. ThomsDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2022