Burt Lancaster v. Linda Metrish
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1DissentAlice M. Batchelder, Chief Judge
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision because Lancaster has not overcome AEDPA’s very high standard to establish that the Michigan Court of Appeals’s determination was an unreasonable application of or contrary to Supreme Court precedent. Before obtaining habeas relief from a federal court, “a state prisoner must show that the state court’s ruling on the claim being presented in federal court was so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.” Harrington v. Richter, — U.S.…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Estelle v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Woodford v. VisciottiSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Bouie v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Early v. PackerSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.