Benchlight The federal appellate judiciary

This writing

Type
Concurrence in part
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.

Justice Alito, concurring in part and dissenting in part. We granted certiorari in this case to answer two questions: “1. Is a federal habeas claim ‘procedurally defaulted’ because it has been presented twice to the state courts? “2. Is a federal habeas court powerless to recognize that a state court erred in holdi…

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 Not attributed April 28, 2009