Martin v. Smith

Supreme Court

Martin v. Smith

136 S. Ct. 1365, 194 L. Ed. 2d 347, 84 U.S.L.W. 3495, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 1824

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMarch 7, 2016

DocketNo. 15–6030.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 136 S. Ct. 1365 (Martin v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Martin v. Smith, 136 S. Ct. 1365, 194 L. Ed. 2d 347, 84 U.S.L.W. 3495, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 1824 (U.S. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further consideration in light of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 718, 193 L.Ed.2d 599 (2016).

Justice THOMAS, with whom Justice ALITO joins, concurring in the decision to grant, vacate, and remand in this case:

The Court has held the petition in this and many other cases pending the decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 718, 193 L.Ed.2d 599 (2016). In holding this petition and now vacating and remanding the judgment below, the Court has not assessed whether petitioner's asserted entitlement to retroactive relief 'is properly presented in the case.' Id., at ----, 136 S.Ct. 718 (slip op., at 13). On remand, courts should understand that the Court's disposition of this petition does not reflect any view regarding petitioner's entitlement to relief. The Court's disposition does not, for example, address whether an adequate and independent state ground bars relief, whether petitioner forfeited or waived any entitlement to relief (by, for example, entering into a plea agreement waiving any entitlement to relief), or whether petitioner's sentence actually qualifies as a mandatory life without parole sentence.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further consideration in light of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 718, 193 L.Ed.2d 599 (2016).

Justice THOMAS, with whom Justice ALITO joins, concurring in the decision to grant, vacate, and remand in this case:

The Court has held the petition in this and many other cases pending the decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 718, 193 L.Ed.2d 599 (2016). In holding this petition and now vacating and remanding the judgment below, the Court has not assessed whether petitioner's asserted entitlement to retroactive relief 'is properly presented in the case.' Id., at ----, 136 S.Ct. 718 (slip op., at 13). On remand, courts should understand that the Court's disposition of this petition does not reflect any view regarding petitioner's entitlement to relief. The Court's disposition does not, for example, address whether an adequate and independent state ground bars relief, whether petitioner forfeited or waived any entitlement to relief (by, for example, entering into a plea agreement waiving any entitlement to relief), or whether petitioner's sentence actually qualifies as a mandatory life without parole sentence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 S. Ct. 1365, 194 L. Ed. 2d 347, 84 U.S.L.W. 3495, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 1824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-smith-scotus-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack