Harris v. Reed, Warden, et al. (489 U.S. 255)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 22, 1989 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
489 U.S. 255 · 109 S. Ct. 1038
Decided
February 22, 1989
Term
October Term 1988
Vote
8–1
Majority author
Justice Blackmun
Issue area
Criminal Procedure
Disposition
Reversed and remanded
Outcome
Petitioning party won
Ideological direction
Liberal

Opinion excerpt

Justice Blackmun delivered the opinion of the Court. In this case, we consider whether the ‘“plain statement’ rule” of Michigan v. Long, 463 U. S. 1032, 1042, and n. 7 (1983), applies in a case on federal habeas review as well as in a case on direct review in this Court. We hold that it does. I Petitioner Warren Lee Harris was convicted in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill., of murder. On direct appeal, petitioner challenged only the sufficiency of the evidence. The Appellate Court of Illinois, by an unpublished order, affirmed the conviction. App. 5; see 71 Ill. App. 3d 1113, 392 N. E. 2d 1386 (1979). Petitioner then returned to the Circuit Court of Cook County and filed a petition for postconviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel had rendered ineffective assistance in several respects, including his failure to call alibi witnesses. The court dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing. The Appellate Court of Illinois, in another unpublished order, again affirmed. App. 9. In its order, the Appellate Court referred to the “well-settled” principle of Illinois law that “those [issues] which could have been presented [on direct appeal], but were not, are considered waived.” Id., at 12. The court found that, “except for the alibi witnesses,” petitioner’s ineffective-assistance allegations “could have been raised in [his] direct appeal.” Ibid. The court,…

Excerpt of a 63,589-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database