Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments

2d Circuit Case Commentaries

Counsel’s Duty at Sentencing: Strickland Standard and the Limits of Cronic Presumption

Counsel’s Duty at Sentencing: Strickland Standard and the Limits of Cronic Presumption

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Counsel’s Duty at Sentencing: Strickland Standard and the Limits of Cronic Presumption Introduction Baker v. Conway is a Second Circuit summary order issued on April 3, 2025, affirming the denial of...
Establishing Standards for §1983 Challenges to Contraband Watch: Deliberate Indifference, Retaliation, and Liberty Interests

Establishing Standards for §1983 Challenges to Contraband Watch: Deliberate Indifference, Retaliation, and Liberty Interests

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Establishing Standards for §1983 Challenges to Contraband Watch: Deliberate Indifference, Retaliation, and Liberty Interests Introduction Johnson v. Chappius is a summary order issued by the United...
No Automatic Cronic Presumption at Sentencing: Strickland Governs Counsel’s Duty and Prejudice in Baker v. Conway

No Automatic Cronic Presumption at Sentencing: Strickland Governs Counsel’s Duty and Prejudice in Baker v. Conway

Date: Apr 4, 2025
No Automatic Cronic Presumption at Sentencing: Strickland Governs Counsel’s Duty and Prejudice in Baker v. Conway Introduction Baker v. Conway is a 2025 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...
Reaffirming Deliberate Indifference and Due Process Boundaries in Prison Contraband Watches: The Johnson v. Chappius Rule

Reaffirming Deliberate Indifference and Due Process Boundaries in Prison Contraband Watches: The Johnson v. Chappius Rule

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Reaffirming Deliberate Indifference and Due Process Boundaries in Prison Contraband Watches: The Johnson v. Chappius Rule 1. Introduction The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s decision in...
Clarifying Ineffective Assistance of Counsel at Sentencing: Strickland’s Application and the Limits of Cronic’s Presumption

Clarifying Ineffective Assistance of Counsel at Sentencing: Strickland’s Application and the Limits of Cronic’s Presumption

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Clarifying Ineffective Assistance of Counsel at Sentencing: Strickland’s Application and the Limits of Cronic’s Presumption Introduction This commentary examines Baker v. Conway, a summary order...
Contraband Watches and Constitutional Protections: Defining Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment Boundaries

Contraband Watches and Constitutional Protections: Defining Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment Boundaries

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Contraband Watches and Constitutional Protections: Defining Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment Boundaries Introduction This commentary examines the Second Circuit’s summary order in Johnson v. Chappius,...
Establishing Objective Penological Necessity: The Non-Deliberate Indifference Standard for Contraband Watches in Johnson v. Chappius

Establishing Objective Penological Necessity: The Non-Deliberate Indifference Standard for Contraband Watches in Johnson v. Chappius

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Establishing Objective Penological Necessity: The Non-Deliberate Indifference Standard for Contraband Watches in Johnson v. Chappius Introduction The Second Circuit’s summary order in Johnson v....
Counsel’s Duty at Sentencing: Establishing Effective Assistance Standards in Baker v. Conway

Counsel’s Duty at Sentencing: Establishing Effective Assistance Standards in Baker v. Conway

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Counsel’s Duty at Sentencing: Establishing Effective Assistance Standards in Baker v. Conway Introduction This commentary examines the Second Circuit’s summary order in Baker v. Conway, decided April...
Validation of Radiologically Based Contraband Watch Protocols: Constitutional Boundaries Under the Eighth, First, and Fourteenth Amendments

Validation of Radiologically Based Contraband Watch Protocols: Constitutional Boundaries Under the Eighth, First, and Fourteenth Amendments

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Validation of Radiologically Based Contraband Watch Protocols: Constitutional Boundaries Under the Eighth, First, and Fourteenth Amendments Introduction Johnson v. Chappius (2d Cir. 2025) arose from...
Retroactive Sex Offender Registration: Regulatory, Not Punitive – Brown v. Mellekas

Retroactive Sex Offender Registration: Regulatory, Not Punitive – Brown v. Mellekas

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Retroactive Sex Offender Registration: Regulatory, Not Punitive – Brown v. Mellekas Introduction In Brown v. Mellekas, 24-970-cv (2d Cir. Apr. 3, 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Regulatory Retrospection: Brown v. Mellekas – Retroactive Sex-Offender Registration and the Ex Post Facto Clause

Regulatory Retrospection: Brown v. Mellekas – Retroactive Sex-Offender Registration and the Ex Post Facto Clause

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Regulatory Retrospection: Brown v. Mellekas – Retroactive Sex-Offender Registration and the Ex Post Facto Clause Introduction In Brown v. Mellekas (2d Cir. Apr. 3, 2025), the United States Court of...
Retroactive Application of Megan’s Law as Non-Punitive Regulation: Ex Post Facto and Due Process Limits

Retroactive Application of Megan’s Law as Non-Punitive Regulation: Ex Post Facto and Due Process Limits

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Retroactive Application of Megan’s Law as Non-Punitive Regulation: Ex Post Facto and Due Process Limits Introduction Brown v. Mellekas, decided April 3, 2025 by the United States Court of Appeals for...
Affirmation of Reasonable Contraband Watch Practices under the Eighth Amendment

Affirmation of Reasonable Contraband Watch Practices under the Eighth Amendment

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Affirmation of Reasonable Contraband Watch Practices under the Eighth Amendment Introduction Johnson v. Chappius, No. 24-1225 (2d Cir. Apr. 3, 2025), arises from an inmate’s challenge to an extended...
Brown v. Mellekas: Retroactive Sex-Offender Registration Is Regulatory, Not Punitive

Brown v. Mellekas: Retroactive Sex-Offender Registration Is Regulatory, Not Punitive

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Brown v. Mellekas: Retroactive Sex-Offender Registration Is Regulatory, Not Punitive Introduction In Brown v. Mellekas, 2d Cir. No. 24-970-cv (Apr. 3, 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for...
Strickland’s Prejudice Mandate at Sentencing: Cronic’s Presumption of Prejudice Confined to Extreme Cases

Strickland’s Prejudice Mandate at Sentencing: Cronic’s Presumption of Prejudice Confined to Extreme Cases

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Strickland’s Prejudice Mandate at Sentencing: Cronic’s Presumption of Prejudice Confined to Extreme Cases Introduction Baker v. Conway is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for...
Strickland at Sentencing: Counsel’s Duty to Prepare and the Narrow Scope of Cronic’s Presumed Prejudice

Strickland at Sentencing: Counsel’s Duty to Prepare and the Narrow Scope of Cronic’s Presumed Prejudice

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Strickland at Sentencing: Counsel’s Duty to Prepare and the Narrow Scope of Cronic’s Presumed Prejudice Introduction This commentary examines the Second Circuit’s April 3, 2025 summary order in Baker...
Affirmation of Non-Punitive Retroactive Sex Offender Registration for Alford Pleas

Affirmation of Non-Punitive Retroactive Sex Offender Registration for Alford Pleas

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Affirmation of Non-Punitive Retroactive Sex Offender Registration for Alford Pleas Introduction Brown v. Mellekas, 24-970-cv (2d Cir. Apr. 3, 2025) is an appeal from the District of Connecticut’s...
Deficient Sentencing Advocacy and the Prejudice Requirement: Clarifying Strickland and Cronic in Baker v. Conway

Deficient Sentencing Advocacy and the Prejudice Requirement: Clarifying Strickland and Cronic in Baker v. Conway

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Deficient Sentencing Advocacy and the Prejudice Requirement: Clarifying Strickland and Cronic in Baker v. Conway Introduction Baker v. Conway is a 2025 decision of the United States Court of Appeals...
Retroactive Application of Connecticut Megan’s Law Is Non-Punitive and Does Not Violate Ex Post Facto or Due Process – Brown v. Mellekas

Retroactive Application of Connecticut Megan’s Law Is Non-Punitive and Does Not Violate Ex Post Facto or Due Process – Brown v. Mellekas

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Retroactive Application of Connecticut Megan’s Law Is Non-Punitive and Does Not Violate Ex Post Facto or Due Process Introduction Brown v. Mellekas, decided April 3, 2025, by the United States Court...
Retroactive Application of Non-Punitive Sex Offender Registration to Alford Pleas Does Not Violate Ex Post Facto or Due Process: Brown v. Mellekas

Retroactive Application of Non-Punitive Sex Offender Registration to Alford Pleas Does Not Violate Ex Post Facto or Due Process: Brown v. Mellekas

Date: Apr 4, 2025
Retroactive Application of Non-Punitive Sex Offender Registration to Alford Pleas Does Not Violate Ex Post Facto or Due Process: Brown v. Mellekas 1. Introduction Brown v. Mellekas is a summary order...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert