Shinn v. Kayer
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Shinn v. Kayer and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Shinn v. Kayer.
In Shinn v. Kayer, the Supreme Court reviewed the Ninth Circuit's decision to grant habeas relief to George Kayer, who claimed ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court found that the Ninth Circuit erred by not adhering to the deferential standard required under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The state court's decision was not beyond the possibility of fairminded disagreement.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Shinn v. Kayer.
The Court held that the Ninth Circuit erred in ordering a writ of habeas corpus due to reasonable disagreement about the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Shinn v. Kayer. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Right to Counsel is relevant to Shinn v. Kayer
The case revolves around the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, which is a fundamental aspect of the right to counsel.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Kayer asserts that his death sentence was imposed in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Shinn v. Kayer
The Supreme Court's decision involves reviewing the Ninth Circuit's application of AEDPA standards, which is a form of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Ninth Circuit resolved this case in a manner fundamentally inconsistent with AEDPA.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Shinn v. Kayer
The case involves procedural aspects of how the state court handled the ineffective assistance claim under AEDPA standards.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The court denied relief after applying the familiar two-part test from Strickland v. Washington.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Shinn v. Kayer that support the summary and concepts above.
The court below erred in ordering issuance of a writ of habeas corpus despite ample room for reasonable disagreement.
The state court's judgment must stand if a fair-minded jurist could agree with either of its alternative holdings.
The prisoner must show that the state court's decision is so obviously wrong that its error lies 'beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.'
