Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 1092

1246 

INDEX 

HABEAS CORPUS—Continued. 

7.  Capital  murder—Sentencing  phase—Ineffective assistance  of  coun­
sel.—It was objectively unreasonable under Strickland v. Washington, 466 
U. S.  668,  for  Florida  Supreme  Court  and  Eleventh  Circuit  to  conclude 
that  there  was  no  reasonable  probability  that  Porter’s  death  sentence 
would  have  been  different  if  sentencing  judge  and  jury  at  his  state-court 
murder trial had heard signiﬁcant mitigation evidence that his counsel had 
failed to discover or present.  Porter v. McCollum, p. 30. 

8.  Capital  murder—Sentencing  phase—Ineffective assistance  of  coun­
sel.—Unreasonable  determination  of  facts.—For  purposes  of  28  U. S. C. 
§ 2254(d)(2), an Alabama court’s conclusion, during postconviction proceed­
ings,  that  petitioner’s  counsel  made  a  strategic  decision  not  to  pursue  or 
present evidence of his mental deﬁciencies during his trial’s penalty phase 
was  not  an  unreasonable  determination  of  facts  in  light  of  evidence  pre­
sented in state-court proceedings.  Wood v. Allen, p. 290. 

9.  Evidence of guilt—Support for jury’s verdict.—Because trial record 
includes  convincing  DNA  and  other  evidence  of  respondent’s  guilt,  lower 
federal  courts  clearly  misapplied  Jackson  v.  Virginia,  443  U. S.  307,  by 
granting  habeas  relief  based  on  a  report  prepared  by  respondent’s  DNA 
expert  over  11  years  after  trial that  called  into  question  some  trial  testi­
mony of State’s DNA expert.  McDaniel v. Brown, p. 120. 

10.  Searches and seizures—Warrantless entry.—Michigan Court of 
Appeals’ decision  afﬁrming suppression  of evidence on  ground that  an of­
ﬁcer’s  warrantless entry  into respondent’s  house  violated Fourth  Amend­
ment  is  contrary  to  this  Court’s  case  law,  particularly  Brigham  City  v. 
Stuart, 547 U. S. 398.  Michigan v. Fisher, p. 45. 

ILLEGAL  IMMIGRATION  REFORM  AND  IMMIGRANT  RESPONSI­
BILITY  ACT  OF  1996.  See  Immigration  and  Nationality  Act. 

ILLINOIS.  See  Constitutional  Law,  I. 

IMMIGRATION  AND  NATIONALITY  ACT. 

Illegal  Immigration  Reform  and  Immigrant  Responsibility  Act  of 
1996—Review  of  Attorney  General’s  determinations.—Title  8  U. S. C.  
§ 1252(a)(2)(B)’s proscription of judicial review of certain immigration deci­
sions applies only to Attorney General determinations made discretionary 
by statute, not to determinations declared discretionary by Attorney Gen­
eral himself through regulation.  Kucana v. Holder, p. 233. 

INEFFECTIVE  ASSISTANCE  OF  COUNSEL.  See  Habeas  Corpus, 

3,  5,  6,  7,  8. 

JUDGE’S  MISCONDUCT  AT  TRIAL.  See  Habeas  Corpus,  2.