Jefferson v. Upton
| Decision Date | 24 May 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. 09-8852.,09-8852. |
| Citation | 130 S.Ct. 2217 |
| Parties | Lawrence Joseph JEFFERSON, v. Stephen UPTON, Warden. |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Petitioner Lawrence Jefferson, who has been sentenced to death, claimed in both state and federal courts that his lawyers were constitutionally inadequate because they failed to investigate a traumatic head injury that he suffered as a child. The state court rejected that claim after making a finding that the attorneys were advised by an expert that such investigation was unnecessary. Under the governing federal statute, that factual finding is presumed correct unless any one of eight exceptions applies. See 28 U.S.C.
To continue reading
Request your trial
8 cases
- Jefferson v. Upton
-
Johnson v. Hatch, CIV 10-0745 JCH/KBM
...2254 CASES IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS (habeas rules for review after answer). 2. See also, e.g., Jefferson v. Upton, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 130 S. Ct. 2217, 2220-22 (2010) (discussion of statutory and Townsend directives concerning deference to state court factual conclusions); Danfor......
-
Soto v. Nance
...not available absent a constitutional violation) (28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3)). 4. E.g., Jefferson v. Upton, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 130 S. Ct. 2217, 2220- 22 (2010) (discussion of pre-AEDPA presumption of correctness principle and 1966 statutory codification); Miller-El v. Dr......
-
Lucas v. Upton
...(Doc. 50 at 22 n.3). The United States Supreme Court and the Eleventh Circuit have criticized this practice. See Jefferson v. Upton, 130 S. Ct. 2217, 2223 (2010); Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353, 1373 (11th Cir. 1997). However, the Supreme Court has stated that while it is not......
Request a trial to view additional results