SCOTUS FUCKS OVER PRISONER--REVERSES GRANT OF HABEAS TODAY
| Heady Kitty Cat | 02/21/12 | | Flickering hairraiser kitchen scourge upon the earth | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 10/09/15 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Soul-stirring Startling Institution | 02/22/12 | | razzle-dazzle useless brakes doctorate | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Unholy Den Police Squad | 02/21/12 | | razzle-dazzle useless brakes doctorate | 02/21/12 | | laughsome dog poop | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | laughsome dog poop | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | laughsome dog poop | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | laughsome dog poop | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 10/21/15 | | jet background story | 02/21/12 | | ebony sickened pervert principal's office | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Soul-stirring Startling Institution | 02/22/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 10/09/15 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Unholy Den Police Squad | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Unholy Den Police Squad | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | appetizing codepig | 02/21/12 | | Cerise Regret | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Cerise Regret | 02/21/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Heady Kitty Cat | 02/22/12 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 02/21/12 | | Exhilarant brethren | 11/27/13 | | Lascivious ultramarine trump supporter striped hyena | 11/27/13 | | Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker | 10/09/15 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 21st, 2012 10:55 AM Author: Heady Kitty Cat
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-680.pdf
Under AEDPA, a federal court may grant a state prisoner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus if the statecourt adjudication pursuant to which the prisoner is held “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates.” 28 U. S. C. §2254(d)(1).
In this case, it is abundantly clear that our precedentsdo not clearly establish the categorical rule on which the Court of Appeals relied, i.e., that the questioning of a prisoner is always custodial when the prisoner is removed from the general prison population and questioned about events that occurred outside the prison. On the contrary, we have repeatedly declined to adopt any categorical rule with respect to whether the questioning of a prison inmateis custodial.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879658&forum_id=2#20016444) |
|
Date: February 21st, 2012 8:48 PM Author: ebony sickened pervert principal's office
you think so? actually both the majority and dissent on this point read like B+ law school exams.
*lists factors favoring party A*
inserts ON THE OTHER HAND
*lists factors favoring party B*
THEREFORE, B WINS
********************
JUSTICE HOOLAHOOP, DISSENTING.
*lists factors favoring party B*
inserts ON THE OTHER HAND
*lists factors favoring party A*
THEREFORE, A WINS
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879658&forum_id=2#20019853) |
Date: February 21st, 2012 9:12 PM Author: jet background story
I think after being arrested and imprisoned once already you should know the drill.
People disagree with that?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879658&forum_id=2#20019995) |
Date: February 21st, 2012 9:29 PM Author: Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker Subject: HAHAHHAHA HOLY SHIT
Nor does the statement in Maryland v. Shatzer, 559 U. S. ___, ___, that “[n]o onequestions that [inmate] Shatzer was in custody for Miranda purposes” support a per se rule. It means only that the issue of custody was not contested in that case.
seriously, how fucking retarded is the sixth circuit?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879658&forum_id=2#20020102) |
Date: February 21st, 2012 9:34 PM Author: Crimson Corn Cake Windowlicker Subject: THE GREAT WRIT DEMANDS THIS MAN'S FREEDOM (slim shady douche)
While serving a sentence in a Michigan jail, RandallFields was escorted by a corrections officer to a conference room where two sheriff’s deputies questioned him aboutallegations that, before he came to prison, he had engaged in sexual conduct with a 12-year-old boy. In order to get tothe conference room, Fields had to go down one floor and
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879658&forum_id=2#20020156)
|
|
Date: February 21st, 2012 9:50 PM Author: Heady Kitty Cat
The initial step in determining whether a person is in Miranda custody is to ascertain, given “all of the circumstances surrounding the interrogation,” how a suspect would have gauged his freedom of movement. Stansbury v. California, 511 U. S. 318, 322, 325. However, not all restraints on freedom of movement amount to Miranda custody. See, e.g., Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U. S. 420, 423. Shatzer, distinguishing between restraints on freedom of movement and Miranda custody, held that a break in Miranda custody between a suspect’s invocation of the right to counsel and the initiation of subsequent questioning may occur while a suspect is serving an uninterrupted term of imprisonment. If a break in custody can occur,it must follow that imprisonment alone is not enough to create a custodial situation within the meaning of Miranda. At least three stronggrounds support this conclusion: Questioning a person who is alreadyin prison does not generally involve the shock that very often accompanies arrest; a prisoner is unlikely to be lured into speaking by alonging for prompt release; and a prisoner knows that his questioners probably lack authority to affect the duration of his sentence. Thus, service of a prison term, without more, is not enough to constitute Miranda custody.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879658&forum_id=2#20020321) |
|
|