State Post-Conviction Remedies in the Next Fifteen Years: How Synergy Between the State and Federal Governments Can Improve the Criminal Justice System Nationally

In the years ahead both the state and federal governments will have a shared interest in improving the fairness of state post-conviction review systems. Under Cullen v. Pinholster, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011) states' post-conviction rulings will be given considerable deference on federal habeas corp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Federal sentencing reporter 2012-04, Vol.24 (4), p.298-299
Main Author: Freedman, Eric M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
Capital cities
Capital punishment
Criminal justice
Criminal sentencing
Due process of law
Effective assistance of counsel
Federal courts
Federal government
Government
Legal proceedings
Petitioners
State government
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In the years ahead both the state and federal governments will have a shared interest in improving the fairness of state post-conviction review systems. Under Cullen v. Pinholster, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011) states' post-conviction rulings will be given considerable deference on federal habeas corpus review if but only if they emerge from procedurally sound systems. This gives the states a finality interest and the federal government a cost-savings interest in the creation of such systems. At the same time unsound systems are increasingly vulnerable to attacks under Section 1983. These converging circumstances make it more desirable than ever that the states provide competent counsel in state post-conviction proceedings.
ISSN:1053-9867
1533-8363
DOI:10.1525/fsr.2012.24.4.298