Kernan v. Hinojosa
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the Court
*1604 PER CURIAM.
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) requires a state prisoner seeking federal habeas relief first to "exhaus[t] the remedies available in the courts of the State." 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b)(1)(A). If the state courts adjudicate the prisoner's federal claim "on the merits," § 2254(d), then AEDPA mandates deferential, rather than de novo, review, prohibiting federal courts from granting habeas relief unless the state-court decision "was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law," § 2254(d)(1), or "was based on…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Ylst v. NunnemakerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Carey v. SaffoldSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- In Re SteeleCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by87 opinions
- Martin Valdez, Jr. v. W. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Foster v. ChatmanSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Freddy Curiel v. Amy MillerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Bush v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019
- May v. RyanDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2017
82 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.