Mays v. Hines
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Mays v. Hines 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 Mays v. Hines.
The Supreme Court reversed the Sixth Circuit's decision to grant habeas relief to Anthony Hines, who was convicted of murder in Tennessee. The Court found that the Tennessee court reasonably rejected Hines' claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, as the evidence against him was overwhelming. The Sixth Circuit's decision was deemed to violate federal habeas standards by not deferring to the state court's judgment.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Mays v. Hines.
The Court held that the Sixth Circuit erred in granting a writ of federal habeas corpus because the Tennessee court reasonably rejected Hines' ineffective assistance of counsel theory.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Mays v. Hines. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Right to Counsel is relevant to Mays v. Hines
The case primarily revolves around the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, which is a violation of the right to counsel.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Hines later sought postconviction relief, claiming his counsel was ineffective for not arguing that Jones could have killed Jenkins.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Mays v. Hines
The case involves the federal court's review of a state court decision under federal habeas corpus standards.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Sixth Circuit erred in granting a writ of federal habeas corpus because the Tennessee court reasonably rejected Hines' ineffective assistance of counsel theory.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Mays v. Hines
The case touches on whether the legal procedures followed in the state court met federal standards for fairness.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)A federal court may intrude on a State's sovereign power to punish offenders only when a decision 'was so lacking in justification . . . beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.'
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Mays v. Hines that support the summary and concepts above.
The Sixth Circuit erred in granting a writ of federal habeas corpus because the Tennessee court reasonably rejected Hines' ineffective assistance of counsel theory.
The Sixth Circuit disregarded the overwhelming evidence of guilt that supported the Tennessee court's conclusion.
A federal court may intrude on a State's sovereign power to punish offenders only when a decision was so lacking in justification.
