Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Ward v. Norris, No. 05-4381

By FindLaw Staff on August 24, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In a capital murder case, district court's rulings denying defendant a writ of habeas corpus and denying his motion for relief from judgment and motion to alter or amend the judgment are affirmed where: 1) defendant's motions, in substance, comprise a claim of ineffective or incompetent representation by federal habeas counsel, and the Antiterrorism Death Penalty Act specifically prohibits such grounds for relief; 2) defendant's claims on appeal concerning ineffective assistance of counsel represented an impermissible broadening of claims to include federal bases before both the state courts and the district court; and 3) defendant's claim that the trial court's disparate treatment of the defense counsel's requests to approach the bench deprived him of a fair trial failed as rulings on those requests did not reflect actual or presumed bias rising to the level of a constitutional violation or structural error.      

Read Ward v. Norris, No. 05-4381

Appellate Information

Submitted: September 24, 2008

Filed: August 24, 2009


Opinion by Wollman, Circuit Judge

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard