In capital habeas proceedings, a circuit court's order requiring the petition to be granted is reversed where petitioner did not establish that defense counsel prejudiced petitioner by providing him ineffective assistance at the penalty phase of his trial, because petitioner failed to show a reasonable probability that the jury would have rejected a capital sentence after it weighed the entire body of mitigating evidence against the entire body of aggravating evidence.

Read Wong v. Belmontes, No. 08-1263

Appellate Information

Filed November 16, 2009

Judges

Per Curiam

Concurrence by Justice Stevens

In a capital habeas matter, a circuit court of appeals' grant of the petition on the basis that petitioner's lawyers performed deficiently in investigating and presenting mitigating evidence is reversed where: 1) the court of appeals applied 2003 ABA Professional Guidelines to defense counsel's conduct at a trial that took place in 1985; and 2) counsel's performance at the trial was not deficient under the standards in place at the time.

Read Bobby v. Van Hook, No. 09-144

Appellate Information

Decided November 9, 2009

Judges

Per Curiam

Concurrence by Justice Alito

In a capital habeas matter, circuit court of appeals' order reversing a district court's order granting habeas relief on a Sixth Amendment claim is vacated and remanded where the circuit court erred in disposing of petitioner's remaining, unaddressed challenges to his death sentence without explanation of any sort.

Read Corcoran v. Levenhagen, No. 08-10495

Appellate Information

Filed October 20, 2009

Judges

Per Curiam

In an action claiming that certain state fair-lending laws were preempted by the National Bank Act (NBA) and accompanying regulations, an injunction in favor of Plaintiffs is affirmed in part, where the state's threatened issuance of executive subpoenas was an improper exercise of "supervisory power". However, the judgment is reversed in part where a federal regulation purporting to pre-empt state law enforcement is not a reasonable interpretation of the NBA.

Read Cuomo v. Clearing House Ass'n., L.L.C., No. 08-453

Appellate Information

Argued April 28, 2009

Decided June 29, 2009

Judges

Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.

Justice Thomas, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Counsel

Attorneys for Petitioner:

Barbara D. Underwood, Counsel of Record, Office of the Attorney General, New York, NY 

Attorneys for Respondents:  

Seth P. Waxman, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Washington, DC

Elena Kagan, Solicitor General,  United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC

Robinson B. Lacy, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, 125 Broad Street, New York, NY

In a Title VII action claiming that a city discriminated against white firefighter candidates for a promotion by discarding their test results based on a statistical racial disparity, summary judgment for Defendants is reversed where the city's action in discarding the tests violated Title VII, because a threshold showing of a significant statistical disparity is far from a strong basis in evidence that the city would have been liable under Title VII had it certified the test results.

Read Ricci v. DeStefano, No. 07-1428

Appellate Information

Argued April 22, 2009

Decided June 29, 2009

Judges

Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court.

Justice Scalia, concurring.

Justice Alito, concurring.

Justice Ginsburg, dissenting.

Counsel

For Petitioners:

Karen Lee Torre, Law Offices of Norman A. Pattis LLC, New Haven, CT

For Respondents:  

Christopher J. Meade, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Washington, DC

Richard A. Roberts, Nuzzo & Roberts, L.L.C., One Town Center, Cheshire, CT

Defendant's drug conviction is reversed, where the trial court's admission of the prosecution's certificates by laboratory analysts, stating that material seized by police and connected to Defendant was cocaine of a certain quantity, violated petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.

Read Melendez-Diaz v. Mass., No. 07-591

Appellate Information

Argued November 10, 2008

Decided June 25, 2009

Judges

Scalia, J. delivered the opinion of the Court.

Kennedy, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA

For Respondent:  

James J. Arguin, Assistant Attorney General, Boston, MA

Martha Coakley, Attorney General, Boston, MA

Susanne G. Reardon, Office of the Attorney General, Boston, MA

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging an unlawful search of a student, the denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity is affirmed where the search of Plaintiff's underwear violated the Fourth Amendment because the facts did not give school officials reasonable suspicion to search her underwear.

Read Safford Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1. v. Redding

Appellate Information

Argued April 21, 2009

Decided June 25, 2009

Judges

Souter, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Stevens, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part

Ginsburg, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Matthew W. Wright, Holm Wright Hyde & Hays PLC, Phoenix, AZ

For Respondent:

Adam B. Wolf, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Santa Cruz, CA

In an action based on Defendant's alleged refusal to pay maintenance and cure to Plaintiff for injuries he suffered while working on Defendant's tugboat, the District Court's order holding that punitive damages were available is affirmed where punitive damages for the willful and wanton disregard of the maintenance and cure obligation remain available as a matter of general maritime law.

Read Atlantic Sounding Co., Inc. v. Townsend, No. 08-214

Appellate Information

Argued March 2, 2009

Decided June 25, 2009

Justices

Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Counsel

David W. McCreadie, Lau Lane Pieper Conley & McCreadie, P.A., Tampa, FL

G.J. Rod Sullivan, Jacksonville, FL

In a motion by state legislators to purge the District Court's contempt order holding that the state was providing inadequate English Language-Learner instruction in the school district at issue, the denial of the motion is reversed, where the lower courts did not engage in the proper analysis under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(5), because they did not analyze whether changed circumstances warranted reexamination of the original judgment.

Read Horne v. Flores, No. 08-289

Appellate Information

Argued April 20, 2009

Decided June 25, 2009

Justices

Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Breyer, J., delivered a dissenting opinion.

Counsel

For Petitioner:

Eric J. Bistrow, Burch & Cracchiolo, P.A., Phoenix, AZ

Kenneth W. Starr, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Los Angeles, CA

Respondents:

Kimberly Anne Demarchi, Lewis & Roca LLP, Phoenix, AZ

Sri Srinivasan, O'Melveny & Meyers LLP, Washington, DC

Timothy M. Hogan, Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, Phoenix, AZ

In an action seeking relief under the "bailout" provision in Section 4(a) of the Voting Rights Act, which allows a "political subdivision" to be released from the preclearance requirements if certain conditions are met, the dismissal of the complaint is reversed where the Act must be interpreted to permit all political subdivisions, including Plaintiff district, to seek to bail out from the preclearance requirements.

Read Northwest Austin Mun. Utility Dist. No. 1. v. Holder, No. 08-322

Appellate Information

Certiorari to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

Argued April 29, 2009

Decided June 22, 2009

Judges

Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court.

Justice Thomas, concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.

Counsel

Attorneys for Appellant:

Gregory S. Coleman, Yetter, Warden & Coleman L.L.P., Austin, TX

Attorneys for Appellees:  

Debo P. Adegbile, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, New York, NY

Renea Hicks, Law Office of Max Renea Hicks, Austin, TX

Elena Kagan, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC 

Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, Washington, DC
   
Paul R.Q. Wolfson, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Washington, DC

Nina Perales, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, San Antonio, TX