The question
Whether a federal appeals court exceeded the limits of AEDPA in granting habeas relief on a claim about a state trial court's response to a jury note.
McCarthy v. Hernandez
What the Court decided
The Court summarily reversed a grant of habeas relief, holding the federal appeals court exceeded the strict limits federal habeas law places on second-guessing state courts. The precedent the appeals court relied on addressed a judge's suppression ruling and said nothing about jury instructions, so no clearly established federal law required the state court to instruct the jury as the appeals court demanded.
How the justices split
UnanimousPer curiam (unsigned)
Delivered by the Court
Federal habeas law forbids overturning a state conviction unless the state court unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court precedent. The precedent invoked here concerned a suppression ruling, not jury instructions, so it did not clearly require the instruction the appeals court demanded. The grant of relief is reversed.
How we know · 2 sourced claims
The Court held the Second Circuit exceeded the limits AEDPA places on federal habeas review.
Source: syllabus, Held, at 25-748
The precedent relied on addressed a suppression ruling, not jury instructions.
Source: syllabus