Legal Document

514 U.S. 115115 S.Ct. 1275131 L.Ed.2d 152 Bryan GOEKE, Superintendent, Renz Correctional Centerv.Lynda Ruth BRANCH. No. 94-898. Supreme Court of the United States March 20, 1995. PER CURIAM. 1 In this case, Eighth Circuit granted habeas relief on ground that it is a violation Fourteenth Amendment due process for state appellate court to dismiss appeal recaptured fugitive where there no demonstrated adverse effect process. The declined consider whether application its ruling in respondent's case would violate principle Teague v. Lane, 489 288, 109 1060, 103 334 (1989) (plurality opinion), concluding State had waived argument. raised bar, and Circuit's novel rule violates Teague's holding. For reason, certiorari judgment reversed. 2 1986, Missouri jury convicted Lynda Branch first-degree murder her husband. On retrial after Appeals reversed conviction because an error admission evidence, again her. moved new trial, trial scheduled hearing April 3, 1989, motion sentence Before hearing, however, Branch, who was free bail, took flight neighboring county. She 6, sentenced life imprisonment without possibility parole. 3 filed timely notice direct review court's denial post-conviction relief. 1991, consolidated dismissed appeals under Missouri's well-established dismissal which provides defendant attempts escape justice forfeits right appeal. 811 S.W.2d 11, 12 (Mo.App.1991) (citing Carter, 98 Mo. 431, 11 S.W. 979 (1889)). "[E]ven absence prejudice state," explained, "the justified by more fundamental principle: preservation public respect our system law." at 12. did not seek Court. 4 petition federal 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleged violated District undertook what termed procedural analysis framework set forth Mathews Eldridge, 424 319, 335, 96 893, 903, 47 18 (1976), denied App. Pet. Cert. 17, 22-24. appealed Circuit, arguing she stated violation. first time, oral argument, panel suggested claim substantive, claim. Id., 137. Branch's counsel, course, welcomed suggestion. ground, divided held pre-appeal defendant's substantive rights Amendment. After State's rehearing en banc, majority modified opinion explain confront applicability point. Turner, 37 F.3d 371, 374-375 (1994). 5 threshold question case. Caspari Bohlen, 510 ----, ---- - 114 948, 952-953, 127 236 Although need entertain defense if has it, see Schiro Farley, 783, 788-789, (1994); Godinez Moran, 509 n. 8, 113 2680, 2685, 125 321 (1993), must apply State, Caspari, supra, U.S., S.Ct., 953. 6 argument preserved record before Appeals. Court, argued "is barred from litigation corpus unless could say, as matter, make law retroactive. Lane." 99 (citation omitted). brief appeal, pointed out issue 374, were decide constitutional prohibited dismissal, "such conclusion be enforced collateral-attack proceeding consistently with principles progeny," 129, Confronted time claim, reasserted prohibition against Lane enforcement rules collateral attack applies full force case." 152. next five pages are devoted questions responses regarding issue. 153-157. 7 This supports position efforts alert problem provided ample opportunity reasoned jud gment Cf. Webb Webb, 451 493, 501, 101 1889, 1894, 68 392 (1981) (federal properly "no doubt [the claim] presented courts those apprised nature or substance claim"). waive issue; considered now; dispositive. See 951-952; Gilmore Taylor, 508 2112, 2115-2116, 124 306 (1993). 8 A purposes one result dictated precedent existing became final." 953 (quoting Teague, 301, 1070) (emphasis deleted); Gilmore, 2116; Graham Collins, 506 892, 897, 122 260 " 'whether considering defendant's] his final have felt compelled conclude [he] seeks required Constitution.' Saffle Parks, 494 484, 488, 110 1257, 1260, 108 415 (1990)). 9 Neither respondent nor identifies proposition substantial basis when fails appear sentencing, becomes fugitive, demonstrates contempt legal system, imposes significant cost expense secure recapture. opined arose conduct "arbitrary," "conscience-shocking," "oppressive sense," "interferes rights," fell within category. 375. These arguments based upon well-settled authority. 10 Respondent rely most part Ortega-Rodriguez States, 507 1199, 1208, 581 There, held, matter supervisory power administer absent some process, former status may well lack kind connection justify sanction dismissal." 1209. decided almost two years final. rationale opinion, moreover, limited powers; suggest fugitive's implicated principles. Nor suggestion made any earlier cases discussing courts. Estelle Dorrough, 420 534, 95 1173, 43 377 (1975); Molinaro New Jersey, 396 365, 90 498, 24 586 (1970); Allen Georgia, 166 138, 17 525, 41 L.Ed. 949 (1897); Bohanan Nebraska, 692, 1390, 31 854 (1887); Smith 94 97, 32 (1876). dissent reinforced point: "There can . Constitution criminal appeal." 1210 (Rehnquist, C.J., dissenting) Evitts Lucey, 469 387, 105 830, 83 821 (1985), Due Process Clause, guaranteeing effective assistance counsel right, permit failure comply procedure ineffective counsel. hold, argues seemed conclude, requires provide would-be appellant satisfied reasonable preconditions own conduct. turned counsel; left intact States' ability accordance rules." 398-399, 837. even does apply, announced falls into exception 'watershed procedure' implicating fairness accuracy proceeding." 495, 1264 311, 1076). here among "small core requiring observance procedures 'implicit concept ordered liberty.' Graham, 903 (some internal quotation marks omitted citations Because require all, Evitts, 393, 834; McKane Durston, 153 684, 687, 14 913, 914-915, 38 867 (1894), cannot said 'be so central accurate determination innocence guilt,' 313, 1077), fall bar. 13 As we explained 140, 526, upheld whose pending, "if acted consonance laws procedure, only very exceptional circumstances feel saying been We might ourselves pursued different course but test." converted administration one. do (and not, face invocation ) reach merits contention. reached neither final, prevents It ordered.

Classification Label: 0