DANTAS
v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ET AL.; PUCKETT V. MISSISSIPPI; NOTTI ET AL. V. COOK INLET REGION, INC.; ROLLESTON V. SANDEASE, LTD., ET AL.; PERSIK V. COLORADO; MARTIN V. WALMER ET AL.; SCOTT V. ELO, WARDEN; ROSS V. ILLINOIS ET AL.; PATTON V. LEMOINE ET AL.; GOLDING V. UNITED STATES, IN RE VEY, JOHONOSON V. SOBINA, SUPERINTENDENT, STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT SOMERSET, ET AL.; SHELTON V. DOS SANTOS ET AL.; JOHNSON V. SMART & FINAL STORES CORP.; LAMBROS V. UNITED STATES; BOYD V. BASKERVILLE, WARDEN; NULL V. UNITED STATES; TAYLOR V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; BREEDLOVE V. CROSBY, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; WAGNER V. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ET AL.; JOHNSON V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; KORNAFEL V. REPETTO; WINTER V. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, IN RE CUNNINGHAM, CONKLE V. POTTER, POSTMASTER GENERAL; ODMAN, AKA ODDMAN, AKA LLEWELYN V. UNITED STATES; BRYSON ET AL. V. JOHNSTON, JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, ET AL.; DELEON V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; LEWIS ET AL. V. EMIGRANTS MORTGAGE CO. ET AL.; SCOTT V. ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES ET AL.; HADDAD V. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; DEGLACE V. UNITED STATES; BELLE V. UNITED STATES ET AL.; RIVERA V. UNITED STATES
DANTAS
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ET AL.; PUCKETT V. MISSISSIPPI; NOTTI ET AL. V. COOK INLET REGION, INC.; ROLLESTON V. SANDEASE, LTD., ET AL.; PERSIK V. COLORADO; MARTIN V. WALMER ET AL.; SCOTT V. ELO, WARDEN; ROSS V. ILLINOIS ET AL.; PATTON V. LEMOINE ET AL.; GOLDING V. UNITED STATES, IN RE VEY, JOHONOSON V. SOBINA, SUPERINTENDENT, STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT SOMERSET, ET AL.; SHELTON V. DOS SANTOS ET AL.; JOHNSON V. SMART & FINAL STORES CORP.; LAMBROS V. UNITED STATES; BOYD V. BASKERVILLE, WARDEN; NULL V. UNITED STATES; TAYLOR V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; BREEDLOVE V. CROSBY, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; WAGNER V. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ET AL.; JOHNSON V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; KORNAFEL V. REPETTO; WINTER V. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, IN RE CUNNINGHAM, CONKLE V. POTTER, POSTMASTER GENERAL; ODMAN, AKA ODDMAN, AKA LLEWELYN V. UNITED STATES; BRYSON ET AL. V. JOHNSTON, JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, ET AL.; DELEON V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; LEWIS ET AL. V. EMIGRANTS MORTGAGE CO. ET AL.; SCOTT V. ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES ET AL.; HADDAD V. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; DEGLACE V. UNITED STATES; BELLE V. UNITED STATES ET AL.; RIVERA V. UNITED STATES
538 U.S. 995
Supreme Court of the United States (2003)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Herring v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Corr., Attorney Gen., State of Fla., 397 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2005)…ution of [petitioner’s] claimfs].” Breedlove v. Moore, 279 F. 3d 952, 960 (11th Cir.) (citation omitted), reh’g and reh’g en banc denied, 48 Fed.Appx. 329 (11th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1204, 123 S.Ct. 1278, 154 L.Ed.2d 1047, reh’g denied, 538 U.S. 995, 123 S.Ct. 1825, 155 L.Ed.2d 699 (2003). Applying the deferential § 2254 standard of review,- the district court correctly affirmed the state court decisions. As set out in Part ILC.l.a. above, the state court decisions were supported by the recor…