Brief filed: 07/14/2010
Documents
Harrington v. Richter
United States Supreme Court; Case No. 09-587
Prior Decision
Decision below 578 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2009).
Argument(s)
AEDPA deference to a state court’s summary disposition does not apply in an ineffective assistance of counsel claim because the plain language of 28 U.S.C. §2254(d) authorizes deferential treatment only after that decision has been subjected to the analyses prescribed in (d)(1) and (d)(2). Where the state court’s decision fails to provide the information necessary to facilitate those analyses, however, the process Congress prescribed cannot be carried out. Held: Section 2254(d) applies to respondent Richter’s habeas petition, even though the state court’s order was unaccompanied by an opinion explaining the court’s reasoning.
Author(s)
John H. Blume and Keir M. Weyble, Cornell Law School, Ithaca, NY.
