Retroactivity

Question 1

General rule of retroactivity in criminal constitutional cases

Answer 1

As a general rule, criminal constitutional law decisions do not apply retroactively. They do apply to:

(1) the particular case decided by the Supreme Court in which it announces the new constitutional rule,
(2) future cases,
(3) cases pending before a trial court, and
(4) cases pending before an appellate court but only those on direct appeal (the first round of appeals before a state appellate court).

Application in those circumstances is not considered to be retroactive.

Question 2

Exceptions to the general rule against retroactivity

Answer 2

The ruling will be applied retroactively if:

(A) the Supreme Court ruling has found that the behavior cannot be subject to criminal sanction (ex: Lawrence v. Texas - prohibiting states from imposing criminal sanctions for consensual same sex sexual activity) or where certain categories of punishment have been prohibited (exs: because of the status of the offender or the nature of the offense)

(B) Watershed Rulings

Question 3

Requirements of watershed rulings

Answer 3

(1) the constitutional change is necessary to prevent an impermissibly large risk of an inaccurate conviction, AND
(2) the constitutional change alters our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements essential to the fairness of a proceeding

Question 4

Montgomery v. Louisiana

Answer 4

Sussing out the distinction between procedural rules and substantive rules

Procedural rules = designed to enhance the accuracy of a conviction or sentence by regulating the manner of determining culpability; even with a procedural error, conviction could still be valid

Question 5

Michigan v. Long

Answer 5

Adequate and independent state ground doctrine - Court requires a plain statement that the lower/state court relied solely on federal law/state law in reaching its decision

Question 6

Adequate and independent state ground doctrine

Answer 6

Rule: The Supreme Court will not review a question of federal law decided by a state court if the decision of that state court rests on a state law ground [can be a substantive or procedural state ground] that is (1) independent of federal law and (2) adequate to support the judgment

Question 7

Meaning of “independent” in the adequate and independent state ground doctrine

Answer 7

If the resolution of the issue is not tied to the federal issues in the case (question of independence normally arises where the state court addresses both federal and state law requirements in its analysis)

Question 8

Meaning of “adequate” in the adequate and independent state ground doctrine

Answer 8

if the judgment would have been upheld even if the federal ground was reversed, then it is adequate

Question 9

Threshold question for the adequate and independent state grounds doctrine

Answer 9

The state ground must not violate federal law requirements (ex: the state court cannot validly dismiss an appeal on a procedural ground, if the state’s procedure would violate the procedural due process requirements of the 14th Amendment)