Fay v. Noia
| Fay v. Noia | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 7–8, 1963 Decided March 18, 1963 | |
| Full case name | Edward M. Fay, Warden, et al., Petitioners, v. Charles Noia. |
| Citations | 372 U.S. 391 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 300 F.2d 345 (CA2 1962) |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brennan, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, White, Goldberg |
| Dissent | Clark |
| Dissent | Harlan, joined by Clark, Stewart |
Overruled by | |
| Coleman v. Thompson (1991) | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
| Darr v. Burford (1950) (in part) | |
Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963), was a 1963 United States Supreme Court case concerning habeas corpus. In a majority opinion authored by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., the Court held that state prisoners were entitled to access to habeas relief in federal court, even if they did not pursue a remedy in state court that was not available to them at the time. Furthermore, the majority in Fay set out the "deliberate bypass" standard, whereby federal habeas courts could not deny petitions brought by state prisoners unless that prisoner had "deliberately bypassed the orderly procedure of state courts" for the adjudication of constitutional claims.
Fay is recognized as one of three highly influential 1963 cases in a "trilogy" of Supreme Court habeas jurisprudence, the other two being Townsend v. Sain and Sanders v. United States.[1][2] The Court's decision in Fay overturned its prior decision in the 1950 case Darr v. Burford "to the extent that it required a state prisoner to seek certiorari in this Court before seeking federal habeas corpus relief." The Supreme Court later partially overruled Fay in its 1977 decision in Wainwright v. Sykes,[3][4] and fully overruled Fay in its 1991 decision in Coleman v. Thompson.[5][6][7]
References[edit]
- ^ "ArtIII.S1.6.9 Habeas Review". Constitution Annotated. Retrieved 2024-05-22.
- ^ Wilson, Frank (1966-06-01). "Federal Habeas Corpus and the State Court Criminal Defendant". Vanderbilt Law Review. 19 (3): 741.
- ^ 433 U.S. 72 (1977)
- ^ Rosenberg, Yale (1978-01-01). "Jettisoning Fay v. Noia: Procedural Defaults by Reasonably Incompetent Counsel". Minnesota Law Review.
- ^ 501 U.S. 722 (1991)
- ^ Inafuku, Rae (1994-01-01). "Coleman v. Thompson - Sacrificing Fundamental Rights in Deference to the States: The Supreme Court's 1991 Interpretation of the Writ of Habeas Corpus". Santa Clara Law Review. 34 (2): 625. ISSN 0146-0315.
- ^ Pettys, Todd (2007-05-01). "Killing Roger Coleman: Habeas, Finality, and the Innocence Gap". William & Mary Law Review. 48 (6): 2313. ISSN 0043-5589.
External links[edit]
Text of Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963) is available from: Cornell Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |