Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Manuel Lee Runnels, Cross-Appellant v. Norman Hess, Warden, and the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma, Cross-Appellees

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided July 13, 1981No. 80-1081 and 80-1083Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLogan, Circuit Judge

I agree with much of the majority opinion, but I cannot agree with its interpretation of the effect of Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 97 S.Ct. 2497, 53 L.Ed.2d 594 (1977), as applied to the problem before us. I would affirm the trial court’s grant of the writ of habeas corpus rather than remand for a hearing on whether the decision not to object to the prosecutor’s comments was deliberate and tactical.1

Habeas corpus in the federal courts has had a checkered development, particularly with regard to the availability of relief in cases in which state courts have refused to consider federal…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Wainwright v. SykesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Fay v. NoiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  5. Henry v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1965

17 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