Legal Opinion · Concurrence

John Gary Arredondo v. George Ortiz

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 20, 2004No. 01-57166Published

1ConcurrenceKozinski, Circuit Judge

I join the majority’s analysis of the duty of states to provide meaningful argument under Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989). I also concur in the result reached by the majority. I write separately because I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the state courts here adopted a not unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Arredondo’s trial was, at bottom, a credibility contest between Arredondo and his alleged victim, Reed, that came down to this question: Which of these men threw the first punch and, therefore, was more likely the…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

25 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