Gutierrez v. Saenz
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Gutierrez v. Saenz 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 Gutierrez v. Saenz.
The Supreme Court ruled that Ruben Gutierrez has standing to bring a § 1983 claim challenging Texas's postconviction DNA testing procedures. The Court found that Gutierrez's procedural due process rights were implicated, as the denial of DNA testing could affect his ability to demonstrate innocence. The decision reversed the Fifth Circuit's judgment, which had vacated the District Court's ruling in favor of Gutierrez.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Gutierrez v. Saenz.
The Court held that Gutierrez has standing to bring his § 1983 claim challenging Texas's postconviction DNA testing procedures under the Due Process Clause.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Gutierrez v. Saenz. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Gutierrez v. Saenz
The case revolves around whether Texas's DNA testing procedures violate Gutierrez's procedural due process rights.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Gutierrez argued that Texas's DNA testing procedures violated his liberty interests in utilizing state postconviction procedures.
-
Why Standing is relevant to Gutierrez v. Saenz
The Court's decision focused on whether Gutierrez had standing to bring his § 1983 claim.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: Gutierrez has standing to bring his § 1983 claim challenging Texas's postconviction DNA testing procedures under the Due Process Clause.
-
Why Substantive Due Process is relevant to Gutierrez v. Saenz
The case involves Gutierrez's substantive due process rights related to his liberty interest in proving innocence.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Individuals convicted of crimes in state court 'have a liberty interest in demonstrating [their] innocence with new evidence under state law.'
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Gutierrez v. Saenz that support the summary and concepts above.
Gutierrez has standing to bring his § 1983 claim challenging Texas's postconviction DNA testing procedures under the Due Process Clause.
Individuals convicted of crimes in state court 'have a liberty interest in demonstrating [their] innocence with new evidence under state law.'
A declaratory judgment in Gutierrez's favor would redress his injury by removing the allegedly unconstitutional barrier Article 64 erected between Gutierrez and the requested testing.
