Citation network
Calderon Vs. Thompson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 29, 1998
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 538 (1998) October Term, 1997 Syllabus Calderon V. ThompsonSearch
-
inherent power to recall their mandates, subject to review for an abuse of discretion, Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSearch
-
standard was not met in this case. The standard is concerned with actual, as compared to legal, innocence. Sawyer v. WhitleySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 333 , 339. To be credible, the claim must be based on reliable evidence not presented at trial. Schlup v. DeloSearch
-
extent than he did. In the District Court's view, these failings prejudiced Thompson under the rule of Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
and now reverse. II Although some Justices have expressed doubt on the point, see, e. g., United States v. OhioSearch
-
to recall their mandates, subject to review for an abuse of discretion. Hawaii 550 Housing Authority v. MidkiffSearch
-
see also Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-EmpireSearch
-
cant limits on the discretion of federal courts to grant habeas relief. See, e. g., McCleskey v. ZantSearch
-
accord, Wood v. BartholomewSearch
-
finality can the victims of crime move forward knowing the moral judgment will be carried out. See generally Payne v. TennesseeSearch
-
Her rera v. CollinsSearch
-
a case of fraud upon the court, calling into question the very legitimacy of the judgment. See Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-EmpireSearch
-
McCleskey, supra, at 491 (quoting Murray v. CarrierSearch
-
of whether the Court of Appeals abused its discretion. Felker v. TurpinSearch
-
Mc Cleskey, supra, at 496 (quoting Murray v. CarrierSearch
-
accord, Harris v. ReedSearch
-
a claim of actual innocence must be based on reliable evidence not presented at trial. Schlup v. DeloSearch
-
in order to correct error is inherent in the judicial power, ante, at 549-550 (citing Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSearch
-
Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-EmpireSearch
-
to the court exercising discretionary authority is the 568 hallmark of such review. General Electric Co. v. JoinerSearch
-
National Hockey League v. MetropolitanSearch
-
the determination to recall is one for which criteria of decision have not become standardized), see United States v. CridenSearch
-
CA3 1981), and to the weighing of these factors in light of the particular facts, see Lawson Prods., Inc. v. AvnetSearch
-
cf. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSearch
-
and yet in death cases the exercise of our discretionary review for just this purpose may be warranted. See Ky les v. WhitleySearch
-
that ineffective assistance of counsel in the rape case had been prejudicial within the meaning of Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
ject to the constraints of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). See, e. g., Nevius v. SumnerSearch
-
had been mistaken, and the conclusions of the District Court suffice to answer yes to that question. See Thompson v. CalderonSearch
-
see Felker v. TurpinSearch
-
courts should defer to district courts' conclusions about substantial legal justification. Cooter & Gell v. HartmarxSearch
-
dealing with innocence of an underlying offense requires no clear and convincing proof, ante, at 560, see Schlup v. DeloSearch
-
Syllabus Calderon V. ThompsonSearch
-
Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSearch
-
of Strickland v. WashingtonSearch
-
United States v. OhioSearch
-
Housing Authority v. MidkiffSearch
-
Wood v. BartholomewSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial