The Federalist Society has this podcast by Philadelphia DDA Ron Eisenberg on the April 4 Supreme Court decision in Cullen v. Pinholster.
Ron first discusses the question of considering new evidence, never presented to the state court, in an attempt to show that the state court was "unreasonable." That issue was decided 7-2 in an unusual line-up. See also our day-of-decision post here. But Ron also thinks the decision on the underlying ineffective assistance claim is even more important. The Court clears up lower court misinterpretations of Williams, Wiggins, and Rompilla, he says, and this is "game changing stuff" if the lower federal courts actually follow it. (This point was decided 5-4, with the usual line-up.)
Ron first discusses the question of considering new evidence, never presented to the state court, in an attempt to show that the state court was "unreasonable." That issue was decided 7-2 in an unusual line-up. See also our day-of-decision post here. But Ron also thinks the decision on the underlying ineffective assistance claim is even more important. The Court clears up lower court misinterpretations of Williams, Wiggins, and Rompilla, he says, and this is "game changing stuff" if the lower federal courts actually follow it. (This point was decided 5-4, with the usual line-up.)
Leave a comment