Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Harrington v. Richter

Docket No.: 09-587
Certiorari Granted: 02/22/10
Argued: October 12, 2010
Decided: 01/19/11

Topics:

Death Penalty, Sixth Amendment, habeas, habeas corpus, ineffective assistance of counsel, murder, res judicata

PartyNames: Kelly Harrington, Warden v. Joshua Richter
Petitioner: Kelly Harrington, Warden
Respondent: Joshua Richter

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: 578 F.3d 944
Supreme Court Docket

Kelly Harrington, Warden
v.
Joshua Richter
Question Presented:

In granting habeas corpus relief to a state prisoner, did the Ninth Circuit deny the state court judgment the deference mandated by 28 U.S.C. section 2254 (d) and impermissibly enlarge the Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel by elevating the value of expert-opinion testimony in a manner that would virtually always require defense counsel to produce such testimony rather than allowing him to rely instead on cross-examination or other methods designed to create reasonable doubt about the defendant's guilt?

Question:

Is a defense lawyer deficient for failing to consult blood evidence when planning strategy for trial?

Note:

IN ADDITION TO THE QUESTION PRESENTED, THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: DOES AEDPA DEFERENCE APPLY TO A STATE COURT'S SUMMARY DISPOSITION OF A CLAIM, INCLUDING A CLAIM UNDER Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)? JUSTICE KAGAN TOOK NO PART

Harrington v. Richter
ORAL ARGUMENT

10/12/10

Listen to Oral Argument in Harrington v. Richter
Holding: reversed and remanded
Vote: 8-0
Recused: J.,
Opinion By:
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)