Michael David Dunn v. Ricky D. Dixon, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

What is the standard of review for a federal habeas court for analyzing a sufficiency-of-the evidence claim under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)?

Does analysis of a sufficiency-of-the-evidence claim pursuant to Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19 (1979), under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) permit a federal habeas court to: A) Consider defendant’s testimony rebutted if said testimony was never affirmatively disputed by any state witness? B) Reject the defendant’s version of events when it is in harmony with the evidence and expert testimony? C) Accept the state’s witness version of events when it is unsupported by physical evidence and expert testimony?

What is the standard of review for a federal habeas court for analyzing whether a defendant who claims self-defense may be prosecuted for firing too many shots at his assailant under Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S.Ct. 2012, 188 L.Ed.2d 1056, 572 U.S. 765 (2014)? LIST OF PARTIES [X] All parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. [ ] All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all parties to the proceeding in the court whose judgment is the subject of this petition is as follows: Page 2 of 28 / Michael David Dunn / SID No. 20966010 Form 42.010