Document: 468 U.S. 1 104 S.Ct. 2901 82 L.Ed.2d Amos REED, etc., and The Attorney General of North Carolina, Petitionersv.Daniel ROSS. No. 83-218. Supreme Court the United States Argued March 27, 1984. Decided June Syllabus In 1969, respondent was convicted first-degree murder in a Carolina state court sentenced to life imprisonment. At trial, he had claimed lack malice self-defense, and, accordance with well-settled law, trial judge instructed jury that burden proving each these defenses. Although appealed his conviction on several grounds, did not challenge constitutionality this instruction. 1975, Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 684, 95 1881, 44 508, struck down, as violative due process, requirement defendant bear malice. 1977, Hankerson 432 233, 97 2339, 53 306, held have retroactive application. Subsequently, after exhausting remedies, brought habeas corpus proceeding Federal District under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging instruction, but relief barred because failed raise issue appeal required by law. Appeals summarily affirmed, vacated remanded for further consideration light Engle Isaac, 456 107, 102 1558, 71 783, Frady, 152, 1584, 816, both which addressed standard procedural bars 2254 whereby prisoner may obtain federal absent showing "cause actual prejudice," when default litigation constitutional claim court. On remand, reversed, holding satisfied "cause" so novel at time attorney could reasonably be expected raised it. And State conceded existence "prejudice." Held: Respondent failing from conviction. Pp. 9-20. (a) Where, case, has abide State's rule requiring exercise legal expertise judgment, competing concerns implicated court's power—on one hand, Congress' interest providing forum vindication prisoners' rights other integrity its rules proceedings finality judgment—have come embodied prejudice" requirement. 9-11. (b) Where is basis available counsel, cause failure applicable procedures. 12-16. (c) Here, sufficiently respondent's excuse attorney's it time. law offer "reasonable basis" upon instruction question. 16-20. 704 F.2d 705 (CA4 1983), affirmed. Richard N. League, Raleigh, N.C., petitioners. Edwin S. Kneedler, Washington, D.C., amicus curiae, special leave Court. Barry Nakell respondent. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Daniel Ross self-defense. Ross, defendant, Six years later, decided 508 (1975), Id., 704, S.Ct., 1892. Two 306 (1977), question presented case whether Ross' forfeited right failing, before those cases were decided, unconstitutionality proof. 2 * A. 3 1970, re Winship, 397 358, 90 1068, 25 368, first we directly foundation criminal guilt established beyond reasonable doubt. That "[l]est there remain any doubt about stature reasonable-doubt standard, . Due Process Clause protects accused against except proof every fact necessary constitute crime charged." 364, 1072. 4 Five applied principle related allocating burdens case. supra. arose context Maine statute "[w]hoever unlawfully kills human being aforethought, either express or implied, guilty shall punished imprisonment life." U.S., 686, n. 3, 1883, 3. "if prosecution homicide intentional unlawful, aforethought conclusively implied unless proved fair preponderance evidence acted heat passion sudden provocation."1 1883. Thus, despite an element offense murder, provided that, if contended without malice, rather "in provocation," he, prosecution, persuasion "fair evidence." Ibid. Noting "[t]he result, such where prove critical dispute, increase likelihood erroneous conviction," id., 701, 1890, process requires respect crime. 5 Finally, supra, reaching conclusion, followed Ivan V. City New York, 407 203, 92 1951, 32 659 (1972), Winship retroactively applicable. Quoting stated: 6 " 'The [reasonable-doubt] provides concrete substance presumption innocence—that bedrock "axiomatic elementary" whose "enforcement lies administration our law". "Due commands no man lose liberty Government borne convincing factfinder guilt." To end, indispensable, "impresses trier necessity subjective certitude facts issue." ' Hankerson, 241, 2344 (quoting V., 204-205, 1952 363-364, 1072-1073)). 7 stated regardless administrative costs involved application new doctrine, '[w]here major purpose doctrine overcome aspect substantially impairs truth-finding function raises serious questions accuracy verdicts past trials, [is] given complete effect.' 243, 2345 204, 1952) (emphasis original). are called again, effect, revisit decision particular set costs—namely, imposed courts courts' their jurisdiction 2254.2 B 8 tried same burden-of-proof gave rise Hankerson's Carolina.3 over 100 years, summarized 288 N.C. 632, 647, 220 S.E.2d 575, 586 follows: 9 "[W]hen defendant's judicial admission, proves intentionally inflicted wound deceased deadly weapon proximately caused death, two presumptions defendant: (1) killing (2) done Nothing else appearing would second degree. When arise devolves satisfaction provocation will rob reduce manslaughter altogether ground If rebuts only, unlawful remains, making manslaughter." 10 11 "[I]n person killed result gun shot fired you assaulted assault her death favor State: One, unlawful; two, malice; then shifts circumstances satisfy jury, nor greater weight evidence, acquit himself charge degree, expect ask your hands verdict less than degree him exonerate show some reason recognized justifiable; relies here self-defense." App. 23-24 deleted). 12 instructions, murder. number Burrus, 275 517, 169 879 (1969), instructions—we confidently assume they sanctioned century yet six away.4 13 challenged instructions shortly Hankerson. He initially petition filed postconviction relief, rejected appellate levels. See Brief Petitioners A3-A8. After instant Eastern 2254. Court, however, law,5 Fourth Circuit dismissed summarily. 660 492 1982). certiorari, judgment 783 (1982), 816 921, 1963, 72 436 (1982). met requirements therefore erred denying writ corpus. (1983). found F.2d, 708-709. "prejudice" been introduced indicate might reflexively went hold concerning self-defense violated Mullaney. 709.6 We granted 464 1007, 523, 78 707 (1983), determine concluding appeal. now affirm. II 14 Our decisions uniformly acknowledged empowered look forfeiture entertain prisoner's contention violated. See, e.g., Francis Henderson, 425 536, 538, 96 1708, 1709, 48 149 (1976); Fay Noia, 372 391, 398-399, 83 822, 826-827, 837 (1963). generally W. Duker, A Constitutional History Habeas Corpus 181-211 (1980). more difficult question, heart is: What standards should govern equitable discretion use power? review merits claim, follow raising implicates sets concerns. expressed prisoners. There can enacting Congress sought "interpose between people, guardians people's rights—to protect people unconstitutional action." Mitchum Foster, 225, 242, 2151, 2162, (1972). 15 judgments, undermined too free ignore forfeitures justice system 50 structured innocence defendants resolve all incident determination, including procedures leading up verdict. Each complement facilitates complex channeling, extent possible, resolution various types stage resolved most fairly efficiently. 16 Carolina's appeal, review, performs function. It affords opportunity while still assess retry effectively prevails Friendly, Is Innocence Irrelevant? Collateral Attack Criminal Judgments, 38 U.Chi.L.Rev. 142, 147 (1970). This type promotes only efficiency decisions, also forcing litigate claims together, quickly docket allow, attention focused power properly court, legitimate interests frustrated: longer evaluate long trial; late collateral challenge. considerations comity orderly require forgo power." 539, 1710. 425-426, 841-842. 17 requirement: prejudice." 129, 1572; Wainwright Sykes, 433 72, 2497, 594 (1977). 91-94, 2508-2510 (BURGER, C.J., concurring); 94-95, 2510-2511 (STEVENS, J., concurring). (Cf. 98-99, 2512-2513 (WHITE, J. concurring judgment).7 turn cause-and-prejudice test 18 As above, petitioners suffered "actual imposing 707. testified stabbed neck immediately prior shooting felt stab "turned around shooting." 18. corroboration testimony, another witness bleeding left scene shooting. Therefore, Thus appeal.8 19 "novelty" time.9 characterized merely "[a] hint voiced contexts," "offe[r] frequently approved used many states, century." 708. 20 open novelty state-court could, general matter, give defense counsel's 131, 1573. Today, answer affirmative. 21 Because broad range potential reasons comply rule, virtually limitless array contexts occur, term precise content. 87, 2506. Nor do attempt here. Underlying concept cause, least dual notion exceptional circumstances, bound tactical competent 91, 14, 2508, 14; Henry Mississippi, 379 443, 451, 85 564, 408 (1965), counsel flout seek refuge consequences conduct, 89-90, 2507-2508; 130, 1572. attorney, therefore, expectation client's later date 89, 2507; 128-129, 1571-1572. Similarly, prospect hedge strategic risks takes 96-97, 2511-2512 judgment). general, make opportunity—for instance, object appeal—and then, discovers tactic unsuccessful, pursue alternative strategy encouragement conduct offend accepted principles comity, undermine systems detriment concerned. Procedural defaults nature are, "inexcusable," Estelle Williams, 501, 513, 1691, 1697, 126 (1976) (POWELL, concurring), cannot qualify purposes review. 22 certain attributable made pursuit interests. unknown situation met.10 formulate setting aside moment exactly what meant basis," see infra, 2910, safe unaware question's latent attribute motives sort. 23 Counsel's existing does seriously implicate otherwise deference bar. Just lawyer fail perceive possibility similarly appreciate claim. concepts, develop slowly, finding partial acceptance meeting rejection others. Despite ultimately enjoy acceptance, currently does, embryonic stage, will, hypothesis, courts. Consequently, truly likely serve functional purpose. remote discover order redress raised, far reject out hand. Raising promote fairness system. true disserved reopen even them. never held, finality, standing alone, sufficient compromise protection 24 addition, it, actually disrupt encouraging include remotely plausible day, gain recognition.11 Particularly disturbed prospect, Judge Haynsworth, writing "If obliged argue conceivable matter haw fetched, preserve post-conviction future, unforeseen development Appellate already overburdened meritless frivolous contentions, effective dilute meritorious ones. Lawyers representing appellants encouraged limit contentions legitimately regarded debatable." 26 Accordingly, issue, action, C 27 agree conclude theory variety contexts, confine specific here: articulated previously Johnson, 457 537, 2579, 73 202 identified three situations "new" 'a clear break past,' emerge 549, 2587 Desist States, 394 244, 258-259, 89 1030, 1038-1039, 248 (1969)). First, explicitly overrule precedents. 551, 2588. Second, "overtur[n] longstanding widespread practice spoken, near-unanimous body lower authority expressly approved." And, finally, "disapprov[e] arguably cases." By definition, falling into categories application, almost certainly urged adopt position adopted. pressed excusable Cases third category, present Whether pressing depends how direct Court's sanction prevailing been, well entrenched relevant strong support sources opposing practice. covered category. Leland Oregon, 343 790, 1002, L.Ed. 1302 (1952), primary addressing constraints imposition trial. insanity doubt, presence tend imply absence mental 806, 1011 (Frankfurter, dissenting). thus confirmed "the long-accepted constitutionally permissible provide affirmative defenses defendant," Patterson 197, 211, 2319, 2327, 281 crafts shift disproving essential consistently engaged century. 5-7. Indeed, until five surfaced courts, Sparks, 285 631, 643-644, 207 712, 719 (1974). Wetmore, 287 344, 353-354, 215 51, 56-57 (1975); Harris, N.C.App. 77, 79, 208 266, 268 29 Moreover, disprove charged. Stump Bennett, 398 111 (CA8 1968). Even alibi, described "den[ial of] [the defendant's] having committed elsewhere." 116. contrasted alibi "an [which] applies justification admitted participation act itself," ibid., distinguished basis, 119. Superior Connecticut individual possess burglary tools "without lawful excuse, him." Nales, Conn.Supp. 28, 29, A.2d 243 (1968). indirect supported all, realistically 30 reached opposite conclusion group 1975. differs one, crucial respects. occurred Isaac stated, "laid petitioners'] claim." during "numerous agreed defenses" (footnotes omitted). 132, 40, 1573, 40 (citing cases). reasonableness emphasized "dozens relied [Winship] them proof." 131-132, None bases III 31 1969 affirm "cause."12 ordered. 33 POWELL, concurring. 34 I join write separately continue adhere views my 246-248, 2346-2347, 35 announced apply For Harlan Mackey 401 667, 675-702, 91 1160, 1164-1185, 404 (1971) (separate opinion), cases. 247-248, 2347 State, proper 36 Assuming, must, forth today, shown timely fashion. 37 REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, BLACKMUN, O'CONNOR join, dissenting. Today's sense laymen lawyers. 1969. eight instituted action seeking improperly placed him, "lack malice" "self-defense." holds must nullified grounds. Responding objection judge, objection, blandly states sustained, contrary. anomalous then-prevailing developments became final. 39 Along way troubling reaffirms importance underlie fully concedes through adopted Sykes. Ante, 11.1 seemingly straightforward determination instance involves labyrinthine treatment flouts common significantly bends thus, Like Appeals, proposes possible form Sykes justify ignoring rule. But equating pushes conundrum refuses recognize. "novel" right, unlikely violation undercuts fundamental untie knot logic, definition makes asserting available. 15-16. course, meaningful content independent factual applied. simply facile; deemed "novel." 41 starting point evaluation 368 (1970), initiated line culminating, hope, Sandstrom Montana, 442 510, 99 2450, 61 (1979). Constitution elements "beyond doubt." treated juvenile trials. With adults settled earlier ranging Miles 103 304, 481 (1881), Holland 348 121, 75 127, 150 (1954). 42 "Expressions opinions assumed required." 362, 1071. 43 short, just year conviction, adult "every Three contrary manslaughter. "implicated itself." 700, 1890. 45 effect decision, dealt argument Wilbur serious, adverse impact country retrials required, reaffirming enunciated stating: 46 "Moreover, persuaded utilize sort burden-shifting devastating asserts. validity asserts, lawyers appropriate objections incorporating presumptions. Petitioner none passed anyway. wish, able insulate convictions enforcing normal valid waiver error." 8, 2345, 8. 47 took solace explicit statement need worry murders contemporaneous-objection today's shows reliance quite unjustified. today about-face mentioning above-quoted language, bar belated assertion goes based allocation reaffirmed indicating speak issues Wilbur. Further, "leading case" subject Oregon mentioned string citation proposition Winship. asserts distinguishing determined similar hardly qualified novel, coming four one-half Though laid asserted rested perceived 39, 39. distinguishes essentially facts, grips reasoning employed 242 (1968), 1968), formed framework here.2 49 reduced bizarre following conclusions: doubt"; considered delinquency words, fortiori ago Court.3 But, seems, manner judges do. Either modes reasoning, seems me, wrong. 51 adequate judgments violates settled. reverse Appeals. explained, "emphasized 'malice inconsistent things' .; latter negate former 686-687, 1883-1884. Title pertinent part: "The thereof, circuit district behalf custody pursuant laws treaties States." second-degree unlawfulness negated unlawfulness. 238, 2342. 'If victim] weapon, presumptions; first, second, '[I]n grounds self-defense.' 236-237, 2341-2342. contemporaneously instructions. time, contemporaneous involving Gause, 227 26, 463 (1946). Under exceptions preserved errors proceedings. Abernathy, 527, 244 696 (1978); White, 274 220, 162 473 1983); Cole Stevenson, 620 1055, 1057-1059 1980). argues inapplicable default. 135, 44, 1575, 2-5. former, "examined [jury] conclude[d that] unobjectionable." 550, 554, 875, 878 (1969). rely dismissing indicates A5, A8. support," 707, reach disposition argument, address forfeiture, 5-10, 41. issue. complied releasing who, work-release status allowed weekend home leaves. Crick Smith, 650 860, 867-868 (CA6 1981); Graham Mabry, 645 603, 606-607 Boyer Patton, 579 284, 286 (CA3 1978). Comment, Review Unintentionally Defaulted Claims, 130 U.Pa.L.Rev. 981, 988-989 himself, Faretta California, 422 2525, 562 view applicability context. Davis 411 93 1577, 216 (1973). petitioner 2255 racial composition grand indicted him. Rule 12(b)(2) Rules Procedure, "[d]efenses defects institution indictment motion trial," "constitutes grant waiver" added). 236, 1579. Davis, shown" Rule. (1976), although provision challenges indictments, nonetheless. Other Courts cause. Norris 687 899, 903 (CA7 1982); Dietz Solem, 677 672, 675 Collins Auger, 577 1107, 1110, 1978); Myers 702 766, 768 (CA9 Gibson Spalding, 665 863, 866 Ford Strickland, 804, 817 (CA11 Sullivan Wainwright, 695 1306, 1311 1983). Corpus—The Defines "Cause" "Prejudice" Standard, Wake Forest L.Rev. 441, 454-456 Several commentators positions. Goodman & Sallet, Sykes: Lower Respond, Hastings 1683, 1712 (1979); 153-154 (1970); Bator, Finality Law Prisoners, 76 Harv.L.Rev. 460 (1963); supra 7, 1012-1013. Hurtado 110 516, 111, 232 (1884), Fourteenth Amendment. Surely, encourage day overruled. Appeals' Part suggests minds matter. clients interests." 14. clear, formulation presage return "knowing "deliberate by-pass" (1963), squarely majority 87-88, 2506-2507. wholly ignores language: "Whether interprets 'presumption innocence,' much clear: shifted crime, clause Amendment violated." 118. imagine clearer prevailed Circuit. 1968; November 13, 1968, Nales strike down Conn.Supp., 31, A.2d, 244. Respondent's came year, enough find justifies part sitting stand last oppression. 10. protectors liberties, judiciary take systemic effects powers. significance social resources area justice, affect distribution allocated, ultimately, remains dispensed energy spent relitigating trials final completely conducted away others demanding whenever announces retroactively, effect. Far preferable, adoption Harlan, should, rare exception, 688-689, 1178, (1971).

Category: 0