Kevin McCarthy, Superintendent, Elmira Correctional Facility v. Pedro Hernandez

The case asked whether the Second Circuit went too far when it set aside Pedro Hernandez's New York conviction after a jury question about whether his statements were voluntary. On June 22, 2026, the Supreme Court said the federal appeals court had gone beyond the strict limits on overturning state convictions in federal court.

The Court acted in an unsigned per curiam opinion without scheduled oral argument and said the Second Circuit went too far. No vote count or separate lineup is provided here.

“AEDPA imposes strict limits on federal courts’ power to grant habeas relief to a prisoner convicted in state court.”

The decision reinforces that federal courts face tight limits when they review state convictions after trial. That affects state prisoners seeking a new trial and state officials defending convictions that federal judges are asked to undo.

The Supreme Court has finished this case. Any further action now belongs to the lower courts, which must follow the Court's decision.

The Court said the Second Circuit was wrong to set aside Pedro Hernandez's New York conviction. It emphasized that federal law sharply limits such relief.

State prisoners seeking federal review are affected, along with state officials defending convictions. A prisoner challenging a jury-note response, for example, now faces stricter limits.

The Supreme Court has finished its work in this case. The lower courts must carry out the decision in any remaining proceedings.