Harris v. Reed, 489 U.S. 255 (1989), is a 1989 United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the plain statement rule of Michigan v. Long applies to federal habeas proceedings originating from state court judgments. This rule prohibits federal courts from reviewing questions of federal law in state court decisions if the state court opinion contains a "plain statement" that its decision is based on an "adequate and independent state ground".[1][2]

Harris v. Reed
Argued October 12, 1988
Decided February 22, 1989
Full case nameWarren Lee Harris, Petitioner v. Marvin Reed, Warden, et al.
Citations489 U.S. 255 (more)
109 S.Ct. 1038, 103 L.Ed.2d 308
Case history
Prior822 F.2d 684 (CA7 1987)
Holding
The "plain statement rule" of Michigan v. Long is not limited to cases on direct review in this Court, but extends as well to cases on federal habeas review.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Case opinions
MajorityBlackmun, joined by Rehnquist, Brennan, White, Marshall, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia
ConcurrenceStevens
ConcurrenceO'Connor, joined by Rehnquist, Scalia
DissentKennedy

References

edit
  1. ^ Halper, Jason (1989-01-01). "Harris v. Reed: A New Look at Federal Habeas Jurisdiction over State Petitioners". Fordham Law Review. 58 (3): 493.
  2. ^ Dooley, Laura (1991-01-01). "Equal Protection and the Procedural Bar Doctrine in Federal Habeas Corpus". Fordham Law Review. 59 (5): 737.
edit