Danforth v. Minnesota, 552 U.S. 264 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that state courts can retroactively apply a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure in post-conviction proceedings by applying state law retroactivity standards that are broader than the Teague v. Lane standard.[1][2][3][4]
| Danforth v. Minnesota | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided February 20, 2008 | |
| Full case name | Danforth v. Minnesota |
| Citations | 552 U.S. 264 (more) |
| Holding | |
| State courts can retroactively apply a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure by applying state law retroactivity standards that are broader than Teague v. Lane. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Stevens |
| Dissent | Roberts, joined by Kennedy |
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ Danforth v. Minnesota, 552 U.S. 264 (2008).
- ^ "States allowed to expand criminal rights". SCOTUSblog. 2008-02-20. Retrieved 2024-11-14.
- ^ "Analysis: 'Creating' or 'declaring' rights". SCOTUSblog. 2008-02-20. Retrieved 2024-11-14.
- ^ "Danforth v. Minnesota". oyez.
External links
edit | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |