Document: 443 U.S. 545 99 S.Ct. 2993 61 L.Ed.2d 739 Jim ROSE, Warden, Petitioner,v.James E. MITCHELL and James Nichols, Jr. No. 77-1701. Argued Jan. 16, 1979. Decided July 2, Syllabus Respondents, who are Negroes, were indicted by a county grand jury in Tennessee for murder. They filed plea abatement seeking dismissal of the indictment on ground, inter alia, that foreman had been selected racially discriminatory fashion. At hearing this plea, respondents called as witnesses 3 commissioners testified only to selection venire; 2 former foremen they never known Negro but not questioned how long resided county; current stated he no knowledge whether any ever served; 11 12 jurors (other than foreman) served when indicted, none whom relative or race past foremen. The trial court denied plea. Subsequently, convicted, Court Criminal Appeals affirmed. Respondents then habeas corpus petition Federal District Court, which dismissed petition, finding respondents' prima facie case discrimination selecting was rebutted State. reversed. Held: 1. Claims racial members state cognizable federal will support issuance writ setting aside conviction ordering quashed, notwithstanding constitutional impropriety tainted petit guilt established beyond reasonable doubt at free from error. Pp. 550-564. (a) Because basis strikes fundamental values our judicial system society whole, criminal defendant's right equal protection laws is group have purposefully excluded. 2997-3001. (b) Such costs exist permitting hear claims reviewing conviction, outweighed recognized policy combatting administration justice. Even though there alternative remedies vindicate rights those class chance serve juries, fact challenges unconstitutional action defendants has been, is, main avenue Fourteenth Amendment vindicated context. 557-559. (c) rationale Stone v. Powell, 428 465, 96 3037, 49 1067, it held where State provided an opportunity full fair litigation Fourth claim direct review, prisoner may be granted relief ground evidence obtained through search seizure introduced his trial, extended indicts petitioner. This latter differs fundamentally application exclusionary rule. concerns allegations itself violated operation system, whereas cases, courts upon evaluate actions police seizing evidence. Moreover, involves charges officials violating command Equal Protection Clause Amendment, statutes passed thereunder, "[n]o shall . deny person within its jurisdiction laws." review necessary ensure defects judiciary's procedure overlooked very judges operate system. 559-564. 2. As matter law, failed make out violation with regard foreman. Respondents' rested entirely testimony two foreman, since ones all about their insufficient establish case. Absent total number appointed during critical period time, difficult say Negroes even if zero, statistically so significant under "rule exclusion." 564-574. 570 F.2d 129, reversed remanded. William M. Leech, Jr., Atty. Gen. Tenn., Walter C. Kurtz, Nashville, respondents. Mr. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion Court.* 1 In case, victims discrimination, them murders first degree. comes issue venire presented; we concerned * November 1972 Mitchell other men jointly Tipton County, Tenn. four charged counts first-degree murder connection shooting deaths patrons robbery place White's Cafe.1 Prior written pro se motion nature abatement. App. sought thereby, together relief, grounds array, fashion.2 Each respondent Negro. counsel represent due course conducted evidentiary hearing, behalf taken County commissioners; foremen; serving time indicted; jury. clerk witness Id., 3-35. 4 close evidence, abatement, orally, order, without comment. 35 36. 5 tried A verdict guilty each count returned. received sentences 60 years count, run consecutively credit allowed spent jail awaiting trial. 6 On appeal, affirmed convictions, finding, respect assignment error relating "facts here do demonstrate systematic exclusion grounds." 38-39. Supreme certiorari. 42. 7 United States Western Tennessee, id., 43-52, 62-73, renewing, among things, allegation referred petitions magistrate who, after studying method selection, recommended hold issues. Specifically, concluded presented unrebutted 84, 90, 97. disagreed jury, judge ruled correctly issue. question, went along magistrate, ordered further response. 98. submitted affidavits acting 102-106, 108-113. these affidavits, dismissed. 121-122. 8 Judge, however, certificate probable cause required Fed.Rule App.Proc. 22(b), 126-127, appealed Sixth Circuit. 9 129 (1978). That deemed unnecessary resolve contentions concerning venire, 134, found sufficient reverse It remanded instructions entry order convictions set reindicted days released. 137. 10 We certiorari consider 439 816, 76, 58 107 II initially address arguments that, specific facts particular go question court, policy, should conviction. First, considered harmless raised, proceeding, defendant properly constituted merits Second, related such longer light decision 1067 (1976). A. For nearly century, unbroken line cases "a cannot stand based excluded reason race." Alexander Louisiana, 405 625, 628, 92 1221, 1224, 31 536 (1972); Bush Kentucky, 110, 119, 633, 27 L.Ed. 354 (1883); Neal Delaware, 103 370, 394, 26 567 (1881). See Castaneda Partida, 430 482, 492-495, n. 12, 97 1272, 1278-1281, 51 498 (1977).3 "is entitled require deliberately systematically participate justice." U.S., 628-629, S.Ct., 1224. Accordingly, proof made rebutted, uniformly returned unconstitutionally quashed. g., Hill Texas, 316 400, 406, 62 1159, 1162, 86 1559 (1942).4 13 Until today, one 100 Strauder West Virginia, 303, 25 664 (1880), departed decisions. dissent Cassell 339 282, 298, 70 629, 637, 94 839 (1950), Jackson voiced lone objection arguing solely occurred noted nothing fairness innocence defendant, reversals conflicted "with another principle important viz., errors affecting substantial accused." 299, 637. 14 could discern permit conflict. place, noted, convicted suffered possible prejudice. Unlike sat determine did ultimate innocence. Once heard determined submit trier fact, once doubt, believed "hardly lies mouth attributable prejudice." 302, 639. "Under circumstances," concluded, "it frivolous contend however constituted, done duty way indict." Ibid. Nor believe justified need enforce discriminated against sit juries race. He pointed Congress crime discriminate manner, 18 U.S.C. § 243,5 civil law equity available against. would "discrimination ., great wrong toward qualified community, defendant," 304, 640, left enforcement interests prosecutions 243 instituted "qualified Negroes." 15 position attracted additional Members expressed separate STEWART Echoing dissent, asserts "the come acknowledge Jackson's [position] unanswerable, rely overturn otherwise valid conviction." Post, 575. argues break chain events preceded it, notes Fifth violated, illegally suppressed, prosecution barred altogether." 576-577 4. believes harmed protected adequately prosecutions, actions, pretrial defendants. circumstances, finds heavy social cost entailed reversal unjustified, especially himself recognize, either corpus, conviction.6 16 course, consistently rejected argument. implicitly reaffirmed context discrimination. Reece Georgia, 350 85, 87, 76 167, 169, 77 (1955); And expressly, argument pressed guise brings before Pierre 306 354, 356-358, 59 536, 537-539, 83 757 (1939). 290, 633 (Frankfurter, J., concurring); 296, 636 (Clark, concurring). decline now depart longstanding consistent practice, adhere Court's previous 17 Discrimination account primary evil Amendments adopted War Between States, including aimed. central Amendment's prohibition State: banned most types purposeful attempt lift burdens placed society. clear earliest applying broad aspects designed eradicate, protect, addressed individual Thus, establishing principles guided decisions years, framed terms larger general understood being core Amendment: "The colored people singled expressly statute jurors, because color, citizens, respects fully qualified, practically brand them, affixed assertion inferiority, stimulant prejudice impediment securing individuals justice aims secure others. [T]he apprehension [such persons] might protection, inducement bestow national government power provision 308, 309. 19 race, odious aspects, pernicious Selection destroys appearance thereby casts integrity process. service serve, impairs confidence public repeatedly emphasized, "not violates Constitution enacted war basic concepts democratic representative government." Smith 311 128, 130, 164, 165, 85 84 (1940) (footnote omitted). harm accused, segment community whole. injury limited defendant—there institution, large, ideal reflected processes courts." Ballard 329 187, 195, 67 261, 265, 91 181 (1946). 20 thus 394; 169. same reason, also quashed inquiry into prejudiced stage. Since beginning, proved, " '[t]he correct wrong, quash indictment[,] panel[;] or, not, corrected superior court,' ultimately review," quoting Virginia Rives, 313, 322, 667 (1880). 633. stated: 21 "[N]o liberty impose Constitution, Act pursuant alike forbid. grant withhold benefits commands all, merely deem innocent guilty. Tumey Ohio, 273 510, 535, 47 437, 445, 71 749, 50 A.L.R. 1243. state's function, ours, assess defendant. But well see throughout bringing him enjoy guarantees. Where, timely laid bare stand, prohibits obtained. something more abstract right. must respect, every demand. Not least merit safeguards extend all—the deserving virtuous."7 22 associated approach. remedy many ways less drastic situations violated. violation, often results suppression highly probative guilt. Here, does render "immune prosecution," nor subsequent reindictment reprosecution "barred altogether," STEWART's suggests. "A whose guilty, [the State] indict try again conforms requirements." 1162. prosecution, remains use obtain 23 event, strong combating regardless remain Prosecutions rare, control courts. Civil expensive maintain lengthy, used. assuming some type open e. petitioning vindication turn commence 24 think better view leave route over vindicated. 114 Strauder, forms still life, Perhaps today takes form subtle before. real pernicious. therefore "to standing directed justice," concurring), conviction.8 B makes (1976), foreclose POWELL, dissenting 508 1, 1287 joined THE CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST, inferentially STEWART, 507, 1286, specifically observed "strong Powell." connection, POWELL goes "moot determination proceed [and any] flaw itself." 1287. Stone, incremental benefit extending means correcting procedures viewed 'outweighed acknowledged vital rational justice.' 494, 3052. echoes arguments. contends alleged affected argues, merits. relatively minor error, involving nonvoting entire following interpretation derived reversing entered error.9 carefully reach opinion. stressed limit scope authority litigating generally." 495 37, 3052-3053 (emphasis original). Rather, confining ruling judicially created rule, minimal utility applied proceeding. "In sum," holding "only apply rule absent showing review." 28 Mindful conclude reasoning Powell court. 29 concern one, decide claim, facts. leads us receive essential Stone. See, 3052, 3053 37. capable performing task 493-494, 35, 3052 35. judiciary purposely different. There independent obtaining broader permit. forum had. 30 Beyond this, differences between Powell. Allegations involve adoption forbids contrasts situation rather personal right." 3053. Indeed, always directly applicable attendant recently States. context, federalism motivated adopt present. prisoners proscribed century. 667. confirmation appropriate vehicle exercise responsibilities likely increase 'friction systems justice, [or impair] maintenance balance doctrine founded.' 491 31, 3051, Schneckloth Bustamonte, 412 218, 259, 93 2041, 2064, 36 854 (1973) (POWELL, 32 Further, large extent perception value deterrent enhanced possibility "conviction overturned collateral proceedings occurring incarceration defendant." 493, "overall educative effect appreciably diminished search-and-seizure raised convictions." find reveal flaws gone undetected appeal. outweigh it. 33 None force here. indeed appreciated perhaps too day-to-day able defective. great, employees judiciary, expected take note court's changed. 34 feeling adjudicating engages preserve transgressed. above, conduct challenged decided validity challenge. true integrity, deprecated issues, much greater cases. given question. justification said improper made. discussion tempted exaggerate quashing improperly significantly suppressing Evidence suppressed used new contrast, quashes indictment, second employed free, therefore, Providing consequence, intrusion State's 37 Finally, seeks substantially compelling legal Where "at government," infects interest making outweighs relief. 38 provide claims. III 39 Notwithstanding holdings present prove standards "in show [foreman] resulted underrepresentation identifiable belongs." 1280. follows: 40 step recognizable, distinct class, different treatment laws, applied. Next, degree comparing proportion population [foreman], time. proof, sometimes 'rule exclusion,' proving delineated class. Finally susceptible abuse neutral supports presumption statistical showing." 41 Only accord approach, burden shift rebut 495, 42 respondents, recognizable laws. 1280; Hernandez 347 475, 478-479, 74 667, 670-671, 98 866 (1954). assume purposes abuse. consideration offered 43 consisted entirety following: 44 three commissioners. These commissioners, white, venire. supra, testify, hardly testified, neither refer 45 next first, Frank McBride, lifelong resident county, age lived county. McBride "ten twelve ago five six times then, just session Court." 17. answer "ever black man," "No, sir." 18. Peyton J. Smith, life but, again, been. "for several back early '50's, occasion illness time." 20. Like answered "No" asked Jimmy Neifeh, approximately know "if wasn't" 25. No Naifeh length 46 jurors10 indicted. Their testimony, individually collectively, Negro; witness, deputy sheriff, case; hostility race; Negroes. knew negative. 26-32. rebuttal, foremen, cross-examination topic. 34-35. 48 Two later recruitment, term, temporary (and former) regular Naifeh. "could I appear me serve." 21. argued experience, replacement proper motive, said, negated played role vote 105; voted foreman's unnecessary. argued, consequence affidavit permanent presided judge, 1966, 5, seven "was unable going term." 112. experience "and good job foreman." concluded: my counties, although member Jury Commission Most Grand Juries Petit sizeable numbers blacks both women. don't appoint Foreman year term expires, usually reappoint problem doesn't up often. really thought appointing doing so." 113. material rebuttal declined writs corpus. "selected reasons, rendered." 122. 52 Appeals, reversing, conceded: elicited meager." F.2d, 132. on, note: "There forewoman according recollections foremen." 134-135. coupled inherent exculpatory asserting benign view, absence vote, held, similarly judgment, powers exercised conducting jury's meant cast them. IV 53 reaching conclusion disagreement seems overemphasized exaggerated "never County." proved judge—by presumably formed part put (Indeed, portion opinion, judge's asserted case.) gave whatsoever record alone fall. 54 covered 1950's occasionally thereafter, except negative "known black," interim serving. Similarly, prior 1973 occasions Negro's having acted indication knowledgeable service. Naifeh's weakest point view. 1951-1973 portions offered. 55 testifying little force. simply response give information point. positive time; parts any. necessarily aware 56 important, 30%.11 11. Given 2-year inclination reappoint, few persons actual If small enough, disparity ratio chosen "sufficiently [that] unlikely [this disparity] accident." 13, Inasmuch appointed, perform calculations comparisons needed out, 496-497, 17, 1281-1282, exclusion" fails. 1280, 13; 480, 671.12 57 Comparison instructive. Norris Alabama, 294 587, 579, 79 1074 (1935), example, duty. summarized Court: "It appeared negro memory lives. Testimony ages ran fifty seventy-six years. uncontradicted. supported officials. commission circuit County. reporter, missed twenty-four effect. One latter, roll 'never single instance history county.' 591, 581. 495-496, 1280-1281; Eubanks 356 584, 586-587, 78 970, 972-973, 991 (1958); 87-88, 169-170; 402-404, 1160-1161. comparison cited stands stark contrast All briefly served. themselves fill gaps serve. Norris, periods served, access records inference result Amendment. well, reached final conclusion. State, questioning oral argument, tended concede ("we contest that"), Tr. Oral Arg. 6-7, brief, described "very questionable." Brief Petitioner 26. Normally, flat concession inadequacy plain. exaggerating equally overlook defect case.13 63 judgment reversed, 64 ordered. 65 concurring part. 66 agree with, joined, opinions Brothers reasons state, decides. Since, majority rejects views, join Parts I, III, REHNQUIST joins, judgment. 68 wholly Why constituted? (dissenting opinion). answered.1 69 proceeding ex parte investigation committed person." Calandra, 414 338, 343-344, 613, 618, 561. determined, him. Any resulting invalid disappears constitutionally doubt.2 short, alleges discriminatorily complaining antecedent conceivable impact settled deprivations occur bar unless itself.3 like "represents process." Tollett Henderson, 411 258, 267, 1602, 1608, 235. Blue, 384 251, 255, 1416, 1419, 510; cf. Stroble California, 343 181, 197, 72 599, 607, 872 ("illegal acts relevant bear petitioner's contention deprived trial"). dealing unlawful arrest particularly Unconstitutional arrests unreasonable seizures violate Amendments. Terry 392 88 1868, 889. Yet, "illegal detention void Gerstein Pugh, 420 103, 95 854, 865, 54. Frisbie Collins, 342 519, 509, 541, forcibly abducted brought fair, upheld Mahon Justice, 127 700, 1204, 283; Ker Illinois, 119 436, 225, 421.4 Costello 359, 397, sustained dismiss exclusively inadmissible hearsay Holt 218 245, 1021. Lawn 355 339, 311, 321, avoid procured "[A]n face subject challenge inadequate incompetent privilege self-incrimination." 345, 618. Cf. Gelbard 408 41, 60, 2357, 2367, 179 ("The 'general rule' Government 'acquire[d] incriminating [rule],' 'tainted jury.' "); 255 3, 1416 3. 73 illegal demonstrable By speculative best, nonexistent. are, implicated excludes denies citizenship. Nation eliminating requires citizens participation can vindicated, convictions. injunctive Carter Comm'n Greene 396 320, 90 518, 549; Turner Fouche, 346, 532, 567. advantage allowing actually injured societal overturned.5 offense official exclude her 243.6 Defendants indictments. But, "[i]t fairly 75 concur overturned. holds, exists, Appeals. composition questioned, respect. Furthermore, litigate attack Whenever things undertaken restraint structured. jurisdiction, requested entertain jurisdiction. contrary federalism, lower almost invariably highest well.1 considerations prompt inquire, critically has, allow seek protect justness purpose suggested today. Originally, action. Ex Watkins, Pet. 193, 202, 650 (1830); Schechtman Foster, 172 (CA2 1949), cert. denied, 924, 1346 (1950); 254, 2061, Oaks, Legal History High Court—Habeas Corpus, Mich.L.Rev. 451, 468 (1966); Bator, Finality Law Habeas Corpus Prisoners, Harv.L.Rev. 441, 466 (1963) (hereinafter Bator). modestly expanded encompass state-court Mangum, 237 309, 582, 969 (1915). recent far historical uses put. Today, variety where, plainly courts, sort committed. Brown Allen, 344 443, 469 (1953); Fay Noia, 372 391, 449-463, 822, 854-862, 837 (Harlan, dissenting). 80 suggest revert 19th-century conception circumstances lacked enter competent expanding lost sight writ. accept district judgments exception be. lawyer knows automatic review. unrelated claimant creation dual exhausted repeats process duplication already exists country parallel world.2 81 heeded admonition thoughtful scholars "made instrument re-determining ended detention." P. Mishkin, D. Shapiro, & H. Wechsler, Hart Wechsler's Courts System 1428 (2d ed. 1973); Bator 446-448. Today's extreme example loss perspective. purpose, move anything heretofore itself. progeny, involved challenged, (1939), (1942), propriety attack. (1977), charge assert hence decided. prisoner's chosen.3 82 pretense extension concededly looks policies justification, noting eliminate allege.4 Apart other, attacking juries,5 irrelevant principled remedy. language implementing suggests special If, incarcerated issue, weigh thoughtfully involved. mention principal briefly. unique allows correctness entails certain whenever common occupy disproportionate amount energy judiciary. ending June 30, 1978, 9,000 petitions. 1978 Annual Report Director Administrative Office 76. petitions, frivolous, deleterious rehabilitative functions Wainwright Sykes, 433 72, 2497, 2508, 594 (1977); Sanders 373 24-25, 1068, 1081-1082, 148 dissenting); 452; Friendly, Is Innocence Irrelevant? Collateral Attack Judgments, U.Chi.L.Rev. 142, 146 (1970). serious structure government.6 Black emphasized importance functions, recognition Union governments, continuance belief National fare best institutions ways." Younger Harris, 401 44, 746, 750, 669 (1971). League Cities Usery, 426 833, 844, 2465, 2470, 245 (1976); 264-265, 2066-2067. 87 Nowhere "proper functions" primarily business extraordinary interfere States' law. supra; Perez Ledesma, 82, 674, 701 overextension threaten runs afoul asserted. interference operations academic. intermediate appellate denigrates institutions.7 89 expansion inflicts society, fabric. When unjustly incarcerated, justified, Great Writ legality individual's tested. Preiser Rodriguez, 1827, (1973); McNally Hill, 293 131, 136-137, 24, 26-27, 238 (1934); 252-256, 2060-2063 providing releasing custody assure pre-eminent objective SeeJackson 307, 315-316, 2781, 2787-2788, 560 (1979); re Winship, 397 358, 371, 1076, 368 (1970) Preventing goal high priority system.8 simply, think, serves important. promote priority. ancient writ, developed precise furthering integrity. unjust helps all. drawn trial.9 Other be, society's juries. supra.10 sum, odds careful analysis approach shows claims, claimant's intrinsic importance. unprincipled administer process, stake. incarceration, claim. WHITE, STEVENS Although "appear[ed]" 99. However, response, Clause. agreed shown, interpreting pointing potential leaves discretion "really appointing" black, 134-135 disagreed, "no against" indictment. 131. redetermine factfindings enunciated governing dissent. difference voiding shown manner prohibited functioning Tennessee,1 fashion selected, prejudice, Arnold North Carolina, 376 773, 1032, (1964); Patton Mississippi, 332 463, 184, (1947); (1942); (1939); (1883). implications meet 'unequal intentional discrimination,' component violation. Washington Davis, 229, 241, 2040, 2048, 597 Generally, alleging relied discrepancy percentage underrepresented combined "that neutral." supra (1970); Comm'n, 549 made, shifts purpose. exclusion," suited focus officeholder lasts instance, statistics 11-year 39% 870 Hispanic, 79% Hispanic. likelihood explained 10140. 1280-1281 sample size overwhelming Castaneda. During period, opportunities term.2 Despite difficulty presentation filling spot, nonetheless supporting reject explicitly Court,3 1951-1973. Berenyi Immigration Director, 385 630, 635, 666, 670, 656 (1967); Graver Mfg. Co. Linde Air Products Co., 336 271, 275, 537, 672 (1949). Assuming selections period,4 50—if blacks, third county's population, whites selected. stronger showing.5 weakness overcome Court. complete person—the judge. potentialities obvious, 497, 1281; 479, 671, (1954) ("key man" system). chose counties 6-year admitted Ibid.6 inconsistent grounds, raise, conjunction previously presentation, shifting Clearly Circuit Judge's self-serving statement "nothing 632, 1226; 361, 540; 481-482, 672-673. authorized performed "constitutional pursue [his] office 404, 1161. STEVENS, prompts explain joining Part indicate forth 839, Member addressed. surely enough BLACKMUN's adherence followed 1880. stare decisis straitjacket forecloses re-examination outmoded rules. does, busy refusing remeasure delicate tipped direction conflicting weighed. 101 heavily WHITE's IV. Chief BURGER WHITE II. crimes presentment Tenn.Const., Art. 14. composed Tenn.Code Ann. 40-1501 (1975), "shall thirteenth organized office, matters coming thereof." 40-1506 (Supp.1978). limitation reappointment. age, lawful man woman," possess qualifications jurors. 40-1507 22-101 forewoman, "key whereby compile list random. §§ 22-223 22-228 (Supp.1978); 40-1502 (1975). Twelve return 40-1706 12. Bolen 544 S.W.2d 918, 920 (Tenn.Cr.App.1976). chairman "presiding officer." 151, 153 (1873). she assisting attorney investigating crime, subpoenas oaths witnesses, endorse bill presence 40-1510, 40-1622, 40-1706, 40-1709 (1975 Supp.1978). endorsement "fatally defective." Bird 343, 344, S.W. 1076 (1899). Kentucky; 177 442, 687, (1900); Rogers 192 226, 257, 417 (1904); (1940); Louisiana. disposition merits, deciding aside, 528, Title provides: "No citizen possessing prescribed disqualified juror condition servitude; whoever, officer summoning fails summon cause, fined $5,000." variation contending "now moot procedural trial," 29, requirement institute Hurtado 110 516, 292, 232 (1884), relieve employ complying press rules raised. Francis 425 1708, 149 pleading 235 (1973). rehearing 142. denying issues therein original submission case." 151. amendment bolstered App., 125. indicates Florida hearing. 27. 1970 census figure 32.44%. Bureau Census, Census Population, Characteristics Table p. 124. urge gap reference relations practiced de jure ways. this. Reference texts kind supply what prove. otherwise, referring apparently places reliance 2254(d), provides part: "[A] factual evidenced reliable adequate indicia, presumed correct, applicant .— "(1) dispute resolved ." LaVallee Delle Rose, 410 690, 1203, 637 proffering relies (1) precedents (2) vigor area recall Frankfurter said: "Wisdom comes, ought late." Henslee Planters Bank, 335 595, 600, 293, 259 wholeheartedly Clause, believe, guarantee protects trials lawfully initiated bring prosecutor. 232. oversight prosecute." Coleman 399 1999, 387, vacated preliminary premised defense develop useful impeachment Favorable preserved. addition, ability discover substance prosecution's prepare effective defense. 9, 2003. immune outstanding searched interrogated "Miranda rights. Illegally altogether. "So advance marginally ends rules, intolerable book." 510. landmark 664. others." 308. directly, undermined. constitutionality 676. Both advocates opponents unusual plays 463 (1963); Reitz, Corpus: Impact Abortive Proceeding, 1315, 1330-1331 (1961). "rerun" file. jailhouse lawyers prisons flourishing repetitive see, score claimant. discusses bases "more compelling" ante, 564. clear, cabin alleged. numerous indictments logic lead points 243, private appeal (1950). infra. "federalism present" habeas, "[f]ederal [313], 322 [25 (1880)]." Ante, 562. reasoning. mere reviewed century exist. Rives petitioner doubts 301-302, 638-639 (Jackson, damages infra, 586. implies trusted presented, administratively 561, 563. unacceptable. own administrative requiring disqualification certainly assumption 263-264, 20, 2066-2067, justify damage perceived ignores notorious undermine public's faith remedied says persuasive complaints survive 574. "any 640. Cassell. am completely satisfied today's attempt. appropriate. Finding considers presenting Nonetheless, overstates 560-564. To sure, 3053, "judicially so, rejecting suggestion "drastic withdrawal jurisdiction," 517, 3063, unlimited. undermining finality absent. Properly understood, unfair presages For, text obtained, probative, prisoner. 136 (1978): vitally 'the thereof.' 40-1506. assist indorse sign indictments, chairperson guide, improperly, decision-making body. (Footnote omitted.) key compare select findings explaining established. dispose necessity remand conclusions clearly conclusion, Finney Arkansas Board Correction, 505 194 (CA8 1974). failure recollect therefrom—not erroneous, Civ.Proc. 52(a)—that supra. adduced insufficient—perhaps unequivocally 1950—the Townsend Sain, 745, 757, 770 (evidentiary "unless reliably facts"); 2254(d)(3) (determination appears hearing"). Clearly, admissions appointing, came ascertaining plaintiff carried considered. party lawsuit turns primary, determinative, aid party.

Category: 0