Owens v. Stirling
| Docket Number | 18-8 |
| Decision Date | 22 July 2020 |
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of state officials on petitioner's 28 U.S.C. 2255 petition for writ of habeas corpus. The court held that the state postconviction court reasonably denied petitioner's exhausted Strickland claims on the grounds that capital sentencing counsel thoroughly investigated and presented his available evidence in mitigation, and did not neglect a viable Confrontation Clause objection to his disciplinary record. The...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
49 cases
-
Huguely v. Clarke
...to determining whether there is any reasonable argument that counsel satisfied Strickland ’s deferential standard." Owens v. Stirling , 967 F.3d 396, 411 (4th Cir. 2020) (cleaned up).Deficient performance alone does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel; the deficiency must also ......
-
Bryant v. Stephan
...An "unreasonable application of federal law" refers to applications that are "objectively unreasonable," Owens v. Stirling , 967 F.3d 396, 411 (4th Cir. 2020) (cleaned up), that is, applications that are "so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended i......
-
Valentino v. Clarke
...as measured by ‘prevailing professional norms’ and in light of ‘all the circumstances’ of the representation." Owens v. Stirling , 967 F.3d 396, 412 (4th Cir. 2020) (quoting Strickland , 466 U.S. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052 ). In evaluating counsel's performance, judicial scrutiny "must be highl......
-
Snyder's-Lance, Inc. v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc.
...the law of the case doctrine is " ‘discretionary’ rather than ‘mandatory,’ and admits of a variety of exceptions." Owens v. Stirling , 967 F.3d 396, 425 (4th Cir. 2020) (quoting CNF Constructors, Inc. v. Donohoe Constr. Co. , 57 F.3d 395, 397 n.1 (4th Cir. 1995) ). By contrast, the use of t......
Get Started for Free