Benchlight The federal appellate judiciary

This writing

Type
Concurrence
Filed
April 28, 2009
Case
Cone v. Bell
Case status
Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

Chief Justice Roberts, concurring in the judgment. The Court’s decision is grounded in unusual facts that necessarily limit its reach. When issues under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 (1963), are presented on federal habeas, they usually have been previously addressed in state proceedings. Federal review is accordingly sharply limited by established principles of deference: If the claim ha…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.

Other writings in this case

TypeAuthorFiled
Opinion Not attributed April 28, 2009
Opinion of the Court Not attributed April 28, 2009
Concurrence in part Not attributed April 28, 2009