NCJ Number
98490
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 74 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1983) Pages: 1404-1424
Date Published
1983
Length
21 pages
Annotation
In Barefoot v. Estelle, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a court of appeals could properly decide in one proceeding the merits of a habeas corpus appeal brought by a State prisoner sentenced to death, together with an application for a stay of execution. This decision departs from the Court's prior emphasis on special procedural protection and thorough review in death penalty cases.
Abstract
In 'Barefoot,' the Court majority apparently viewed the earlier decisions in Nowakowski v. Maroney, Carafas v. LaVallee, and Garrison v. Patterson as supporting the use of summary proceedings in cases where a certificate of probable cause has been obtained. It is not clear, however, that these precedents support the use of summary proceedings in cases where the petitioner's claims are not frivolous. The holdings in these cases involved proper procedure for ostensibly nonfrivolous appeals in which a certificate of probable cause had been issued. Language in these opinions discussing the use of summary procedures was apparently aimed not at nonfrivolous appeals where a certificate had been issued, but at appeals found to be frivolous by the court of appeals, despite the granting of the certificate of probable cause. The 'Barefoot' decision also detracts from the Court's precedents that emphasize the importance of procedural protections and thorough review in death penalty cases. Two important policy considerations indicate that summary proceedings should not be used in such cases. First, summary proceedings pose a risk that death-row inmates seeking habeas relief will receive inadequate legal representation. Second, summary proceedings have the potential for providing inadequate judicial review. A total of 123 footnotes are provided.