Six on habeas

Petitioner’s habeas claims include a Fourth Amendment claim barred by Stone. Steward v. Napoli, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169230 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 2025).* Same: Bogan v. Christiansen, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 22218 (6th Cir. Aug. 27, 2025).

The state court applied Jardines to determine entry through an unlocked gate to get access to petitioner’s front door was a reasonable application of federal law. [Stone not discussed.] Popke v. Andes, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169183 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2025).*

Even where the Fourth Amendment claim arises at trial, Stone v. Powell applies to bar habeas relief. Robertson v. Guerrero, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168197 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 28, 2025).*

Defendant can’t bring his search and seizure claim in habeas. Even as in ineffective assistance of counsel, he can’t prevail because the search wasn’t unreasonable. Church v. Vannoy, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169370 (M.D. La. July 31, 2025),* adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168332 (M.D. La. Aug. 28, 2025).*

Search and seizure claims aren’t cognizable in habeas. Sanchez v. Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169455 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 31, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d). Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.