Legal Opinion

Huenefeld v. Maloney

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided July 29, 1999No. Civil Action 98-10445-RGSPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER ON MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

STEARNS, District Judge.

Upon review of the Magistrate Judge’s thorough Report and the petitioner’s Objections, I will adopt her Recommendation that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be DENIED. I agree with the Magistrate Judge’s finding that the prosecutor’s “[o]ne tells you why” statement constituted an improper comment on the petitioner’s decision not to testify (Ground 8) but that in the totality of the trial the error was not of such magnitude as to cast doubt on the integrity of the verdict.

SO ORDERED.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION…

2Cases cited67 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Matos Ortiz v. Com. of Puerto RicoDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2000
  2. Bowling v. ParkerDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2001
  3. Huenefeld v. DOC MassachusettsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
  4. People v. YankawayIllinois Supreme Court · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API