Reviewing expert evidence
Cavazos v. Shirley Ree Smith
In brief
The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s ruling for Smith and sent the case back for more proceedings.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · October 31, 2011 · Per curiam
- What it’s about
- Shirley Ree Smith, convicted in her infant grandson’s death, received relief from the Ninth Circuit after it found the evidence insufficient amid conflicting expert testimony about the cause of death.
- Who it affects
- The Ninth Circuit’s ruling for Smith was overturned, and her case returns to that court for further proceedings.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Acting warden Javier Cavazos asked the Supreme Court to overturn that ruling; the Court did so and sent the case back for further proceedings (remanded).
Shirley Ree Smith was convicted in the death of her infant grandson. The Ninth Circuit granted her relief after finding the evidence insufficient amid conflicting expert testimony about the cause of death.
The dispute grew out of conflicting expert testimony about the cause of death in Smith’s grandson’s case and the Ninth Circuit’s review of her conviction.
Question presented
Did the Ninth Circuit exceed its authority under the deferential standard for habeas corpus review by granting relief for insufficient evidence based on its acceptance of the cause-of-death testimony of defense experts over the contrary opinion of prosecution experts?
What the Court decided
Holding
The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
- Result
- Reversed
The vote
- Majority author
- Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor
From the opinions
“The Court’s summary disposition of this case, in my judgment, is a misuse of discretion.”
What's next
The case returns to the Ninth Circuit for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.
Documents
Opinions
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Opinion added: Cavazos
More questions
- What did Justice Ginsburg say the Court should have done?
- She said the Court should have refused California’s request to review the case, arguing that the justices had used their discretion improperly.
- What did the judge who first reviewed Smith’s challenge say?
- Justice Ginsburg said the judge thought Smith should not receive relief but also said the evidence raised many questions.
- What facts did Justice Ginsburg cite?
- She pointed to no evidence that Smith had abused or neglected the other children she helped raise and no identified event that might have prompted the assault.
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.