ANDERSON

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Hughes v. State, 901 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 2005)
  …at 693, 91 S.Ct. 1171). This exception applies only to "watershed” rules of procedure “central to an accurate determination of innocence or guilt.” Id. at 311, 313. . See, e.g., Sanders v. State, 815 So. 2d 590, 592 (Ala.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 956, 122 S.Ct. 358, 151 L.Ed.2d 271 (2001); State v. Sepulveda, 201 Ariz. 158, 32 P. 3d 1085, 1088 (Ct.App.2001); People v. Bradbury, 68 P. 3d 494, 499 (Colo.Ct.App.2002), cert. denied, No. 02SC850, 2003 WL 1958429 (Col. Apr. 28, 2003); People v. De La…
• Washington v. Crosby, 324 F.3d 1263 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …s set forth by Supreme Court case law, or (2) the state court, in a case with facts indistinguishable from those in a decision of the Supreme Court, arrives at a different result. Bottoson v. Moore, 234 F. 3d 526, 531 (11th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 956, 122 S.Ct. 357, 151 L.Ed.2d 270 (2001). “A state court decision involves an unreasonable application of Supreme Court precedent ‘if the state court identifies the correct governing legal rule from [Supreme Court] cases but unreasonably applies it to…