Legal Opinion

Matylinsky v. Budge

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 18, 2009No. 08-15459PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TALLMAN, Circuit Judge:

We must decide whether trial counsel was ineffective in a 1984 Nevada murder case. 1 Frank Matylinsky (“Matylinsky”) alleges that his attorney provided ineffective assistance under the standard set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). We disagree, and we affirm the district court’s denial of habeas relief.

I

After spending an evening drinking and ingesting illicit substances, Matylinsky returned home to his pregnant wife, Margaret (“Peggy”) Matylinsky. Domestic violence ensued. Though Matylinsky claims he does not recall…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Estelle v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Jackson v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  5. United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

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

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Palmer v. HendricksCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
  2. Phillip Hartsfield v. Stephanie DorethyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
  3. Treesh v. BagleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2010
  4. John Lesko v. Secretary Pennsylvania DepartmCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2022
  5. Towery v. SchriroCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010

45 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