Degrijze v. Artuz
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
SUMMARY ORDER
Petitioner-appellant Richard Degrijze appeals the order of the District Court, entered April 1, 2003, denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We have considered all of Degrijze’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims, and we find each to be without merit, at the very least for failing to satisfy the second Strickland prong. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (“A convicted defendant’s claim that counsel’s assistance was so defective as to require reversal of a conviction ... [must] show [inter alia ] that the deficient…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Harris v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Robert Rodriguez v. Robert Mitchell, Superintendent, Eastern Correctional Facility, and Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, State of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- People v. DegrijzeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mohsin v. EbertDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2009