Howes v. Walker

Linked with:

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
11-1011 6th Cir. Not Argued Jun 11, 2012 TBD TBD OT 2011

Issue: (1) Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2)’s invitation to decide the reasonableness of a state-court factual determination fits with 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1)’s command that an underlying state-court fact determination must be presumed correct; (2) whether the Sixth Circuit violated Section 2254(d)(1) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) by granting habeas relief on a purportedly unreasonable application of state law; and (3) whether the Sixth Circuit violated AEDPA § 2254(d)(1) by asserting its own prejudice standard – that a defendant “must only show that he had a substantial defense” – rather than this Court’s clearly established law as set forth in Strickland v. Washington, that prejudice requires a showing that, but for counsel’s error, there is a reasonable probability of a different outcome.

Judgment: Granted, vacated and remanded in light of Parker v. Matthews on June 11, 2012.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Briefs and Documents

Certiorari-stage documents

 
Share:
Term Snapshot
Awards