Wood v. Allen should not be confused with Woody Allen.
| Litigants: | Wood v. Allen |
| Decidedate: | January 20 |
| Decideyear: | 2010 |
| Usvol: | 558 |
| Uspage: | 290 |
| Holding: | The state court’s conclusion that the petitioner's counsel made a strategic decision not to pursue or present evidence of his mental deficiencies was not an unreasonable determination of the facts. Habeas petition denied. |
| Majority: | Sotomayor |
| Dissent: | Stevens |
| Joindissent: | Kennedy |
Wood v. Allen, 558 U.S. 290 (2010), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the state court's conclusion that the petitioner's counsel made a strategic decision not to pursue or present evidence of his mental deficiencies was not an unreasonable determination of the facts. The Court therefore denied the habeas corpus petition.[1] Having thus disposed of the claim, the Court declined to decide the issues the petition raised about interpreting the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.[2]