FEDERAL HABEAS BEHIND BARS: PRESERVING EVIDENTIARY REVIEW AFTER CULLEN V. PINHOLSTER AND HARRINGTON V. RICHTER.Published in:UMKC Law Review, 2012, v. 81, n. 1, p. 207By:Doty, GregPublication type:Article
SMOKING GUNS: THE SUPREME COURT'S WILLINGNESS TO LOWER PROCEDURAL BARRIERS TO MERITS REVIEW IN CASES INVOLVING EGREGIOUS RACIAL BIAS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.Published in:Marquette Law Review, 2017, v. 101, n. 1, p. 205By:LEONETTI, CARRIEPublication type:Article
COUNTERFACTUAL CONTRADICTIONS: INTERPRETIVE ERROR IN THE ANALYSIS OF AEDPA.Published in:Stanford Law Review, 2013, v. 65, n. 1, p. 203By:Burns, Amy KnightPublication type:Article
SOMETHING'S GOT TO GIVE: THE ANOMALY AND DOCTRINAL TENSION IN THE WAKE OF PINHOLSTER AND MARTINEZ.Published in:Houston Law Review, 2015, v. 52, n. 5, p. 1497By:Martens, GordonPublication type:Article
ENFORCING THE ABA GUIDELINES IN CAPITAL STATE POST-CONVICTION PROCEEDINGS AFTER MARTINEZ AND PINHOLSTER.Published in:Hofstra Law Review, 2013, v. 41, n. 3, p. 591By:Freedman, Eric M.Publication type:Article