New facts in federal review
Cullen v. Scott Lynn Pinholster
In brief
The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and said Pinholster was not entitled to federal relief based on the state-court record.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 8-1 · April 4, 2011 · Opinion by Justice Breyer
- What it’s about
- Scott Pinholster challenged his California conviction and death sentence in federal court, arguing his trial lawyers failed to provide effective legal help; a federal district court granted relief after hearing new evidence.
- Who it affects
- Pinholster could not keep the federal relief a lower court had granted; the Supreme Court said he was not entitled to relief on the state-court record.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, deciding Pinholster was not entitled to relief based on the record before the state court.
Pinholster challenged his California conviction and death sentence, saying his trial lawyers did not provide effective legal help. A federal district court granted relief after hearing new evidence.
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act sets rules for federal court review of state prisoners’ claims.
Question presented
Can a federal court overturn a state criminal conviction on the basis of facts the defendant could have alleged, but did not, in state court?
What the Court decided
Holding
On the record before the state court, Pinholster was not entitled to federal habeas relief. Pp. 14‘–31. 590 F. 3d 651, reversed.
- Result
- Reversed
The Court's reasoning
The Court considered Pinholster’s request for federal relief based on the record before the state court and concluded he was not entitled to relief.
The vote
- Joined the judgment
- Dissented
- Wrote an opinion
- Majority · 8joined the Court's opinion
- Dissenting · 1disagreed with the result
- Sotomayorwrote the dissent
From the opinions
“Some habeas petitioners are unable to develop the factual basis of their claims in state court through no fault of their own.”
What's next
The Supreme Court’s ruling ends its review of Pinholster’s federal claim and leaves him without relief based on the state-court record.
Documents
Opinions
Audio
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 5 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Audio Recording added: Oral Arguments - Cullen
Opinion added: Cullen
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.