Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Banks Vs. Dretke

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Feb 24, 2004

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

74 entries 17 linked 57 unlinked
Show
  1. Withrow Vs. Williams US Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1993
  2. Penry Vs. Lynaugh US Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1989
  3. Brady Vs. Maryland US Supreme Court · May 13, 1963
  4. Keeney Vs. Tamayo-reyes US Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1992
  5. Amadeo Vs. Zant US Supreme Court · May 31, 1988
  6. Bracy Vs. Gramley US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1997
  7. United States Vs. Bagley US Supreme Court · Jul 02, 1985
  8. Granberry Vs. Greer US Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1987
  9. Miller-el Vs. Cockrell US Supreme Court · Feb 25, 2003
    Distinguished
  10. Rose Vs. Lundy US Supreme Court · Mar 03, 1982
  11. Strickler Vs. Greene US Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1999
  12. Gray Vs. Netherland US Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1996
  13. Kyles Vs. Whitley US Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1995
  14. Mooney Vs. Holohan US Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1935
  15. Murray Vs. Carrier US Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1986
  16. Slack Vs. Mcdaniel US Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2000
  17. Lindh Vs. Murphy US Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1997
  18. Syllabus October Term, 2003 Banks V. Dretke
    Search
  19. Supreme Court of the United States Banks V. Dretke
    Search
  20. s actions violated Brady v. Maryland
    Search
  21. required Banks to exhaust available state-court remedies in order to pursue federal-court relief. See, e.g., Rose v. Lundy
    Search
  22. both cause for his failure to develop facts in state court, and actual prejudice resulting from that failure. Keeney v. Tamayo-Reyes
    Search
  23. U. S. 1 , 11. A Brady prosecutorial misconduct claim has three essential elements. Strickler v. Greene
    Search
  24. s arrangement with Deputy Huff. Cf. Kyles v. Whitley
    Search
  25. Farr misrepresented his dealings with police, the prosecution allowed that testimony to stand uncorrected. Cf. Giglio v. United
    Search
  26. s police connections, for state law entitled him to no such aid. Further, Roviaro v. United
    Search
  27. has counseled the use of careful instructions on submission of the credibility issue to the jury. See, e.g., On Lee v. United
    Search
  28. s application in such proceedings. Harris v. Nelson
    Search
  29. s litigation conduct, see, e.g., Gray v. Netherland
    Search
  30. of his constitutional claims or that the issues presented warrant encouragement to proceed further. Miller-El v. Cockrell
    Search
  31. III. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Scalia, J., joined. Banks v. Dretke
    Search
  32. Opinion of the Court Banks V. Dretke
    Search
  33. Supreme Court of the United States No. 02-8286 Delma Banks, Jr., Petitioner V. Doug
    Search
  34. Banks v. State
    Search
  35. s green Mustang, and to hearing gunshots in Pocket Park at 4 a.m. on April 12. Banks v. State
    Search
  36. and a claim of improper exclusion of minority jurors in violation of Swain v. Alabama
    Search
  37. see Rose v. Lundy
    Search
  38. U. S., at 87. We set out in Strickler v. Greene
    Search
  39. U. S., at 276, n. 14 (quoting App. in Strickler v. Greene
    Search
  40. cf. Kyles v. Whitley
    Search
  41. Giglio v. United
    Search
  42. States, 405 U. S. 150 , 153 (1972) (quoting Mooney v. Holohan
    Search
  43. prosecutors would not stoop to improper litigation conduct to advance prospects for gaining a conviction. See Berger v. United
    Search
  44. U. S. 214 , 222 (1988) (quoting Murray v. Carrier
    Search
  45. U. S. 899 , 909 (1997) (quoting United States v. Chemical
    Search
  46. Berger , 295 U. S., at 88. See also Olmstead v. United
    Search
  47. Finally, relying on Roviaro v. United
    Search
  48. Strickler , 527 U. S., at 282. Our touchstone on materiality is Kyles v. Whitley
    Search
  49. informers pose. On Lee v. United
    Search
  50. accord, Hoffa v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial