MCGUIRE ET AL.

v.

ROCK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ET AL.; MUSSER V. SALOMON/SMITH BARNEY, INC.; JUDGE V. HATCH ET AL.; HOGAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES V. MARTINO, DBA NORTH GEORGIA ORTHOPAEDICS; JUDGE V. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA; RODRIGUEZ REYNA V. STEWART ET AL.; HUFF V. LUEBBERS, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER; BROSEH V. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; JACKSON V. RAMSEY COUNTY; LEVERTON V. CITY OF HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT ET AL.; HAWKINS V. UNITED STATES; LURIA V. LURIA; WASHINGTON V. LOUISIANA STATE BOARD OF PRIVATE SECURITY EXAMINERS; BANKS V. PIZZINGRILLI, SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA; LITTLEJOHN V. UNITED STATES; DENNEY V. KANSAS; TILLI V. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ET AL.; ELLIS V. UNITED STATES; NORWOOD V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Putman v. Head, 268 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2001)
  …hat is prudent or appropriate, but only what is constitutionally compelled.’” Chandler v. United States, 218 F. 3d 1305, 1313 (11th Cir.2000) (en banc) (quoting Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776, 107 S.Ct. 3114, 3126, 97 L.Ed.2d 638 (1987)), cert. denied 531 U.S. 1204, 121 S.Ct. 1217, 149 L.Ed.2d 129 (2001). Furthermore, “[t]he burden of persuasion is on a petitioner to prove, by a preponderance of competence evidence, that counsel’s performance was unreasonable.” Id. (citing Strickland, 104 S.Ct. at 2064). Th…
• Crawford v. Head, 311 F.3d 1288 (11th Cir. 2002)
  …S.Ct. 158, 100 L.Ed. 83 (1955)). This presumption is even stronger when the reviewing court is examining the performance of an experienced trial counsel. See Chandler v. United States, 218 F. 3d 1305, 1316 (11th Cir.2000) (en banc), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1204, 121 S.Ct. 1217, 149 L.Ed.2d 129 (2001). In this case, the state habeas court acknowledged that ineffective assistance of counsel claims are governed by Strickland and that the petitioner was required to show both ineffectiveness and prejudice. To…
• van Poyck v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 290 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2002)
  ….” Waters v. Thomas, 46 F. 3d 1506, 1511 (11th Cir.1995) (en banc) (quoting Rogers v. Zant, 13 F. 3d 384, 386 (11th Cir.1994)). For assessing a lawyer’s performance, Chandler v. United States, 218 F. 3d 1305 (11th Cir.2000) (en banc) cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1204, 121 S.Ct. 1217, 149 L.Ed.2d 129 (2001), sets out the basic law: “Courts must indulge the strong presumption that counsel’s performance was reasonable and that counsel made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgmen…