Legal Opinion

Cheney v. Washington

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 2, 2010No. 08-35204PublishedCited by 197 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

IKUTA, Circuit Judge:

James Cheney claims he was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel because his defense counsel failed to object properly at two points during his trial. This appeal raises the question whether the state court’s decision rejecting this claim was objectively unreasonable. Applying “the doubly deferential judicial review that applies to a Strickland, claim evaluated under the [28 U.S.C.] § 2254(d)(1) standard,” Knowles v. Mirzayance, — U.S.-,-, 129 S.Ct. 1411, 1420, 173 L.Ed.2d 251 (2009), we hold that the state court’s decision was…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Bell v. ConeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Lockyer v. AndradeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  5. United States v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by197 opinions

  1. Gulbrandson v. RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  2. United States v. StinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  3. Doody v. RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  4. Paul Zapata v. Rodolfo VasquezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
  5. Michael Demirdjian v. William SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016

192 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