 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Walker v. Stanley, No. 06-1406,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's request for COA, in accordance with 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(1)(A), was denied because he failed to show he had exhausted state court remedies before filing 28 U.S.C.S. § 2241 habeas petition. Although exhaustion requirement was nonjurisdictional, district court properly raised defense of nonexhaustion sua sponte and dismissed on that basis.
|
|||||
| Wickham v. Friel, No. 05-4077,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: On 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 petition, district court's holding that prisoner's ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim was time-barred was reversed because, based on 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244(d)(1)(D) and (d)(2), prisoner filed his petition within one year after he could have discovered the basis of his claim when a codefendant's case became available.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
