Sumner, Warden v. Mata (455 U.S. 591)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 22, 1982 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 455 U.S. 591 · 102 S. Ct. 1303
- Decided
- March 22, 1982
- Term
- October Term 1981
- Vote
- 6–3
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. This is the second time that this matter has come before us. In Sumner v. Mata, 449 U. S. 539 (1981), decided last Term, we held that 28 U. S. C. § 2254(d) requires federal courts in habeas proceedings to accord a presumption of correctness to state-court findings of fact. This requirement could not be plainer. The statute explicitly provides that “a determination after a hearing on the merits of a factual issue, made by a State court of competent jurisdiction. . . , shall be presumed to be correct.” Only when one of seven specified factors is present or the federal court determines that the state-court finding of fact “is not fairly supported by the record” may the presumption properly be viewed as inapplicable or rebutted. We held further that the presumption of correctness is equally applicable when a state appellate court, as opposed to a state trial court, makes the finding of fact, and we held that if a federal court concludes that the presumption of correctness does not control, it must provide a written explanation of the reasoning that led it to conclude that one or more of the first seven factors listed in § 2254(d) were present, or the “reasoning which led it to conclude that the state finding was ‘not fairly supported by the record.’” 449 U. S., at 551. Applying these general principles to the case at hand, we found in our decision last Term that the…
Excerpt of a 23,478-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.