Court Opinion

ID: 9470169
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 02:58:31.669046+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:41:45.794507
License: Public Domain

FAY, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
I concur in the result reached in Judge Vance’s scholarly opinion based on the precedent of Guice v. Fortenberry, 661 F.2d 496 (5th Cir.1981) (en banc). However, I personally still adhere to the views expressed by Judge Reavley’s dissenting opinion in Guice. Unfortunately we are trying to accommodate and reconcile conflicting authorities. It seems to me that the principles of comity and federalism are paramount and straightforward. Federal courts should not be required to hold hearings nor be asked to grant relief based upon evidentiary material which has never been presented to the state courts when the state courts afford procedures by which the evidence could have been considered.