Legal Opinion
Woodberry v. Hannigan
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided April 17, 2002No. 01-3166PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Thomas Woodberry, a Kansas inmate proceeding pro se, brought this petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, contending he received ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and the Kansas Department of Corrections violated his constitutional rights…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- O'Sullivan v. BoerckelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Picard v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- O'Neil v. VermontSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Brooks v. StateCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Woodberry v. BruceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
- Bethany v. CrowDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2022