Legal Opinion
Pirtle v. Lambert
District Court, E.D. Washington
Decided June 26, 2001No. CT-98-5028-JLQPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HA-BEAS CORPUS CONCERNING PENALTY ONLY
QUACKENBUSH, Senior District Judge.
Before the Court is the one remaining claim in Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Todd Maybrown and James Lobsenz represent Petitioner. Paul Weisser and Donna Mullen represent Respondent. Having reviewed the entire record, and being fully advised in this matter, It Is Hereby Ordered that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is (Conditionally Granted Concerning Penalty Only for the following reasons.
I. Factual and Procedural…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pirtle v. MorganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Nader AbdallahCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2018
- Blake Pirtle v. Richard Morgan, Superintendent of Washington State Penitentiary, Blake Pirtle v. Richard Morgan, Superintendent of Washington State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002