Summary
U. S. Supreme Court decision utilizing CJLF arguments to reinstate the death sentence of a habitual criminal who killed a man during a home burglary in Los Angeles. In 1984, Scott Pinholster was convicted on strong evidence, including his own incriminating statements, and sentenced to death. Over the next 25 years, six courts reviewed his claim that his defense attorney had failed to adequately present evidence of his mental health problems. In 2009, after a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit reviewing the case on habeas corpus rejected the claim, a larger en banc panel accepted it and overturned Pinholster’s death sentence. The en banc panel, after reviewing a third psychiatric evaluation not presented in state court, ruled that the California Supreme Court’s denial of Pinholster’s claim was unreasonable. CJLF joined the high court appeal of that ruling to argue that the Ninth Circuit violated federal law, which prohibits federal courts reviewing a state court decision on habeas corpus from considering evidence never presented to the state court. The court’s decision adopted that reasoning. [CJLF brief in PDF.]
