The U.S. Supreme Court summarily reversed on Friday an Alabama death-row inmate’s habeas corpus win on ineffective assistance, in a case that Justice Sonia Sotomayor said continues a troubling trend in rulings against those facing execution. The 6-3 split marks the end of a high court term that frequently saw that divide in capital cases, including in disputes over the previous administration’s resumption of federal executions.
Matthew Reeves argued that his trial lawyer was ineffective for not hiring an expert to evaluate him for intellectual disability, even after the lawyer secured funds for that reason. An Alabama federal district judge denied habeas relief on that ground, but the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed that denial. The Supreme Court majority on Friday reversed the Eleventh Circuit in an unsigned opinion.
Justice Stephen Breyer noted his dissent. In Sotomayor’s dissent, joined by Justice Elena Kagan, she said that the majority “rescues the state court’s decision” through “linguistic contortion.” The decision “continues a troubling trend in which this Court strains to reverse summarily any grants of relief to those facing execution,” she wrote. "This Court has shown no such interest in cases in which defendants seek relief based on compelling showings that their constitutional rights were violated."
The case is Dunn v. Reeves, 20-1084 (S. Ct. July 2, 2021).