Hughes Transportation v. United States

The dispute included whether Sweeney could have been the shooter based on his location and the bullet-wound angle. The Supreme Court reversed the Fourth Circuit's order for a new trial because that court relied on a claim Sweeney had never made.

The Court issued a per curiam opinion reversing the Fourth Circuit; no individual justice is named in the opinion excerpt.

“The Fourth Circuit reversed and ordered a new trial, relying on a claim that Sweeney never asserted.”

The decision limits appeals courts from ordering new trials based on arguments a defendant did not raise. It affects people challenging criminal convictions in federal court, including Sweeney.

The Supreme Court has finished its action. The Fourth Circuit's new-trial order no longer stands.

The Court reversed the Fourth Circuit's order granting Sweeney a new trial. It said the appeals court relied on a claim Sweeney never raised.

Sweeney is directly affected because his new-trial order was reversed. The decision also affects defendants whose appeals involve arguments they did not make.

The Supreme Court has completed its action. The Fourth Circuit's order for a new trial no longer stands.