Clark V. Sweeney (Party Presentation) Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) podcast

Content provided by Jake Leahy. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Jake Leahy or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) »
Clark v. Sweeney (Party Presentation)

3d ago 5:53

MP3•Episode home

Send us a text

In Clark v. Sweeney, the Supreme Court reversed a Fourth Circuit decision that had granted habeas relief on a theory the petitioner never raised. A Maryland jury convicted Jeremiah Sweeney of second-degree murder, and his convictions were affirmed on appeal. In postconviction proceedings, Sweeney argued that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request voir dire of the full jury after a juror conducted an unauthorized visit to the crime scene. State courts rejected that claim, and the federal district court likewise denied habeas relief, concluding that the state court’s application of Strickland was not objectively unreasonable.

The Fourth Circuit reversed, not on the ineffective-assistance claim Sweeney actually asserted, but on a new theory that a combination of failures by the juror, the judge, and counsel violated Sweeney’s confrontation and jury rights. The panel ordered a new trial despite the State never having the opportunity to address that theory. A dissent criticized the majority for disregarding fundamental principles of party presentation.

The Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit had “departed so drastically from the principle of party presentation as to constitute an abuse of discretion.” In the Court’s view, federal courts may not grant relief on claims the petitioner did not present and that the State had no chance to contest. The case is remanded for the Fourth Circuit to evaluate only the ineffective-assistance claim Sweeney actually pursued, under AEDPA’s deferential standards governing federal review of state adjudications of Strickland claims.

513 episodes

#Government #RJ Dieken #Supreme Court #Legal #Supreme Court Opinion #Slip Opinion #Scotuscast #Court #Law #News #Politics #Podcasting Education #SCOTUS #Supreme Court Decision