context: No editorials sounded the call for justice, nor did any county officials make public, blatantly prejudicial comments. Finally, the disclosure that Mills was in jail for a parole violation did not suggest that juror prejudice should have been presumed.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that petitioner had failed to establish presumed prejudice despite a substantial number of jurors' exposure to newspaper articles disclosing inadmissable evidence
citation_a.sentence: See Marsden v. Moore, 847 F.2d 1536, 1543 (11th Cir.) (holding that petitioner had failed to establish presumed prejudice despite a substantial number of jurors’ exposure to newspaper articles disclosing inadmissable evidence), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 983, 109 S.Ct. 534, 102 L.Ed.2d 566 (1988); cf. Bundy, 850 F.2d at 1425 (“[Prejudice is not presumed simply because the defendant’s criminal record is well publicized.”).
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 850 F.2d 1425, 1425
citation_b.parenthetical: "[Prejudice is not presumed simply because the defendant's criminal record is well publicized."
citation_b.sentence: See Marsden v. Moore, 847 F.2d 1536, 1543 (11th Cir.) (holding that petitioner had failed to establish presumed prejudice despite a substantial number of jurors’ exposure to newspaper articles disclosing inadmissable evidence), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 983, 109 S.Ct. 534, 102 L.Ed.2d 566 (1988); cf. Bundy, 850 F.2d at 1425 (“[Prejudice is not presumed simply because the defendant’s criminal record is well publicized.”).