Legal Opinion
Childers v. Floyd
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided June 2, 2011No. 08-15590PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge:
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, 28 U.S.C. § 2241, et seq., requires federal habeas courts to defer to a state court’s “adjudication on the merits” of a habeas petitioner’s claim. When a state court has ruled on the merits of a petitioner’s claim, that adjudication cannot be disturbed unless it was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). Today, we are called on to define what…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Nicole Harris v. Sheryl ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
- Samuel Moreland v. Margaret BradshawCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Loggins v. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2011
- Floyd Rayner, III v. David MillsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Mackle Vincent Shelton v. Secretary, Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.