PER CURIAM. A death sentence imposed by a Kentucky trial court and affirmed by the Kentucky Supreme Court has been overturned, on habeas corpus review, by the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. During the jury selection process, the state trial court excused a juror after concluding he could not give sufficient assurance of neutrality or impartiality in considering whether the death penalty should be imposed. The Court of Appeals, despite the substantial deference it must accord to state-court rulings in federal habeas proceedings, determined that excusing the juror…
Category: 2015
DIRECTV, INC., PETITIONER v. AMY IMBURGIA, ET AL.
JUSTICE GINSBURG, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR joins, dissenting. It has become routine, in a large part due to this Court’s decisions, for powerful economic enterprises to write into their form contracts with consumers and employees no-class-action arbitration clauses. The form contract in this case contains a Delphic provision stating that “if the law of your state” does not permit agreements barring class arbitration, then the entire agreement to arbitrate becomes unenforceable, freeing the aggrieved customer to commence class-based litigation in court. This Court reads that provision in a manner most protective of…
DIRECTV, INC., PETITIONER v. AMYIMBURGIA, ET AL.
JUSTICE BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. The Federal Arbitration Act states that a “written provision” in a contract providing for “settle[ment] by arbitration” of “a controversy . . . arising out of” that “contract . . . shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.” 9 U. S. C. §2. We here consider a California court’s refusal to enforce an arbitration provision in a contract. In our view, that decision does not rest “upon such grounds as exist . . . for…
DIRECTV, INC. v. IMBURGIA ET AL.(2015)
Petitioner DIRECTV, Inc., and its customers entered into a service agreement that included a binding arbitration provision with a class-arbitration waiver. It specified that the entire arbitration provision was unenforceable if the “law of your state” made class-arbitration waivers unenforceable. The agreement also declared that the arbitration clause was governed by the Federal Arbitration Act. At the time that respondents, California residents, entered into that agreement with DIRECTV, California law made class-arbitration waivers unenforceable, see Discover Bank v. Superior Court, 36 Cal. 4th 148, 113 P. 3d 1100. This Court subsequently held in AT&T Mobility…
SHAPIRO ET AL. v. MCMANUS, CHAIRMAN, MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, ET AL. (2015)
United States Supreme Court SHAPIRO ET AL. v. MCMANUS, CHAIRMAN, MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, ET AL.(2015) No. 14-990 Argued: November 04, 2015Decided: December 08, 2015 Since 1976, federal law has mandated that a “district court of three judges shall be convened . . . when an action is filed challenging the constitutionality of the apportionment of congressional districts . . . ,” 28 U. S. C. §2284(a), and has provided that “the judge [presented with a request for a three-judge court] shall, unless he determines that three judges are not required, immediately notify the chief judge of the circuit,…
LLOYD RAPELJE, WARDEN v. JUNIOR FRED BLACKSTON (2015)
United States Supreme Court LLOYD RAPELJE, WARDEN v. JUNIOR FRED BLACKSTON(2015) No. 15-161 Argued:Decided: November 30, 2015 The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE SCALIA, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS and JUSTICE ALITO join, dissenting from denial of certiorari. A criminal defendant “shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” U. S. Const., Amdt. 6. We have held that this right entitles the accused to cross-examine witnesses who testify at trial, and to exclude certain out-of-court statements that the defendant did not have a prior opportunity to cross-examine. Crawford v. Washington, 541 U. S. 36,…
CHADRIN LEE MULLENIX v. BEATRICE LUNA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ISRAEL LEIJA, JR., ET AL. (2015)
United States Supreme Court CHADRIN LEE MULLENIX v. BEATRICE LUNA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ISRAEL LEIJA, JR., ET AL.(2015) No. 14-1143 Argued:Decided: November 09, 2015 PER CURIAM. On the night of March 23, 2010, Sergeant Randy Baker of the Tulia, Texas Police Department followed Israel Leija, Jr., to a drive-in restaurant, with a warrant for his arrest. 773 F. 3d 712, 715-716 (CA5 2014). When Baker approached Leija’s car and informed him that he was under arrest, Leija sped off, headed for Interstate 27. 2013 WL 4017124, *1 (ND Tex.,…
MARYLAND, PETITIONER v. JAMES KULBICKI (2015)
United States Supreme Court MARYLAND, PETITIONER v. JAMES KULBICKI(2015) No. 14-848 Argued:Decided: October 05, 2015 PER CURIAM. A criminal defendant “shall enjoy the right . . . to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” U. S. Const., Amdt. 6. We have held that this right requires effective counsel in both state and federal prosecutions, even if the defendant is unable to afford counsel. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U. S. 335, 344 (1963). Counsel is unconstitutionally ineffective if his performance is both deficient, meaning his errors are “so serious” that he no longer functions as “counsel,” and prejudicial, meaning…
MARVIN PLUMLEY, WARDEN v. TIMOTHY JARED AUSTIN (2015)
United States Supreme Court MARVIN PLUMLEY, WARDEN v. TIMOTHY JARED AUSTIN(2015) No. 14-271 Argued:Decided: July 21, 2015 The motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE THOMAS, with whom JUSTICE SCALIA joins, dissenting from the denial of certiorari. Forty-six years ago, this Court created a presumption of judicial vindictiveness that applies when a judge imposes a more severe sentence upon a defendant after a new trial. North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U. S. 711, 725-726 (1969). That presumption was–and remains–an anomaly in our law, which ordinarily…
RICHARD GERALD JORDAN v. MARSHALL L. FISHER, COMMISSIONER, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ET AL. (2015)
United States Supreme Court RICHARD GERALD JORDAN v. MARSHALL L. FISHER, COMMISSIONER, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ET AL.(2015) No. 14-8035 Argued:Decided: June 29, 2015 The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE GINSBURG and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting from the denial of certiorari. Three times, the same prosecutor sought and obtained a death sentence against petitioner Richard Jordan. And each time, a court vacated that sentence. After Jordan’s third successful appeal, the prosecutor entered into a plea agreement whereby Jordan would receive a sentence of life without the possibility of parole.…