Properties (54)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:appeal |
yes
|
| gptkbp:applicationNumber |
02-1500
|
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
civil
|
| gptkbp:citedBy |
325 F.3d 876
|
| gptkbp:controversy |
prejudice standard
failure to investigate failure to call witnesses |
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit
|
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
2004
|
| gptkbp:filingDate |
2002
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Kowalski v. Tesmer
|
| gptkbp:impact |
due process rights
fair trial rights criminal defense habeas corpus law legal representation standards habeas corpus petitions effective assistance of counsel standard |
| gptkbp:judges |
Moore
Sutton affirmed Gilman |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
habeas corpus
ineffective assistance of counsel |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
performance analysis
public defender ineffective assistance standard prejudice analysis |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
criminal law
constitutional law standard for ineffective assistance |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
court's reasoning
legal standards applied final ruling evidentiary hearing factual basis for claims habeas corpus appeal ineffective assistance claim state court findings |
| gptkbp:outcome |
remanded
reversed in part denial of relief |
| gptkbp:party |
Kowalski
Tesmer |
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:Strickland_v._Washington
gptkb:Rompilla_v._Beard Wiggins v. Smith |
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Strickland_v._Washington
gptkb:Miller_v._Alabama gptkb:Rompilla_v._Beard gptkb:Bobby_v._Van_Hook Wiggins v. Smith |
| gptkbp:state |
gptkb:Michigan
|