On Point blog, page 1 of 42
SCOTUS reinstates murder conviction because clearly established federal law does not require jury to determine legality of defendant’s confession.
McCarthy v. Hernandez, USSC No. 25-748, 6/22/2026, reversing a decision of the 2nd Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS reversed the court of appeals’ decision granting habeas relief to a man convicted in 2016 of murdering a six-year old boy in 1979 because the lower court did not correctly apply clearly established federal law regarding the jury’s role in assessing the legality of the defendant’s confessions.
SCOTUS holds that cell phone user has reasonable expectation of privacy in location history data; remands to court of appeals to assess whether a geofence warrant was reasonable.
Chatrie v. United States, USSC No. 25-112, 6/29/2026, reversing a decision of the 4th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS determined that police conduct a search when they gain access to location history data from a third party because a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his or her cell phone’s location. The Court remanded to the federal court of appeals to determine whether the geofence warrant at issue was reasonable.
SCOTUS issues another Second Amendment decision invalidating Hawaii’s restriction on carrying of arms
Wolford v. Lopez, USSC No. 24-1046, 6/25/2026, reversing a decision of the 9th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
In another contentious 2nd Amendment case, SCOTUS provides more information for litigators seeking to apply the newer test for evaluating challenged firearm regulations.
SCOTUS: Appeal waiver unenforceable if it results in miscarriage of justice
Hunter v. United States, USSC No. 24-1063, 6/18/2026, reversing a decision of the 5th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS holds that a defendant’s agreement with the government not to appeal a sentence is unenforceable if it would result in a miscarriage of justice that would bring the judicial system into disrepute.
In narrow defense win, SCOTUS invalidates federal statute prohibiting firearm possession by drug users
United States v. Hemani, USSC No. 24-1234, 6/18/2026, affirming a decision of the 5th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
In a unanimous decision, SCOTUS agrees that a federal statute permitting disarmament of persons who are “unlawful users” of controlled substances violates the Second Amendment.
SCOTUS denies cert. while Justice Sotomayor encourages Court in a future case to correct lower courts’ improper standard for assessing prejudice for IAC claims based on Batson.
Clark v. Mississippi, USSC No. 25-6846, 6/8/2026, denying petition for certiorari; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS denied Tony Terrell Clark’s petition for a writ of certiorari from the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision affirming his conviction at a capital trial. Clark argued he received ineffective assistance of counsel during jury selection because his trial lawyer did not adequately raise a Batson challenge when the State struck black jurors at a rate five times more than white jurors. Justice Sotomayor joined the Court’s decision to deny certiorari because Clark did not argue his counsel’s performance was deficient, but explained in an accompanying statement why the Court needs to address the conflict among state and federal courts regarding the standard to evaluate prejudice for a Batson claim.
SCOTUS reverses and holds that appellate court erroneously considered newly-discovered evidence in ruling against defendant
Whitton v. Dixon, USSC No. 25-580, 6/1/2026, reversing a per curiam decision of the 11th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
In an unusual defense win involving “peculiar” conduct by the Eleventh Circuit, SCOTUS wades through the thicket of habeas law and reverse and remands for further consideration of Whitton’s Giglio claim.
SCOTUS grants habeas relief to death row inmate because trial court did not determine whether state’s proffered race-neutral bases for excluding potential black jurors were pretextual
Pitchford v. Cain, USSC No. 24-7351, 5/28/2026, reversing 126 F. 4th 422 (5th Cir. 2025); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
Batson v. Kentucky held that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits prosecutors from exercising peremptory challenges based on race. A three-step process is used to implement Batson. First, the defendant must make a prima facie case that a peremptory strike was based on race. If the defendant meets this burden, the state must provide a race-neutral reason for the challenged strike. The defendant may then rebut the prosecutor’s race-neutral reason by showing it was pretextual.
SCOTUS held, in a 5-4 decision, that the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably applied Batson when it affirmed the defendant’s conviction for murder after the trial court did not address whether the prosecutor’s proffered race-neutral bases for striking four of five potential black jurors were pretextual. The Court also found the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably determined the facts because it concluded the defendant waived his Batson challenge even though he was not provided an opportunity to rebut the state’s proffered race-neutral explanations and was later assured by the trial court that his Batson objection was preserved for the record.
SCOTUS issues per curiam opinion concluding officer had reasonable suspicion for seizure
D.C. v. R.W., USSC No. 25-248, 2/25/2025, reversing In re R.W., 334 A.3d 593 (D.C. 2025); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs)
SCOTUS reverses DC Court of Appeals decision that an officer stopped R.W. without reasonable suspicion and in violation of the Fourth Amendment based on the totality of the circumstances.
SCOTUS holds that trial court may limit discussion between defendant and counsel during overnight trial recess about defendant’s testimony for its own sake but not about issues incidental to testimony.
Villarreal v. Texas, USSC No. 24-557, 2/25/2025, affirming Villarreal v. State, 707 S.W.3d 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 2024) ; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS holds that testifying criminal defendant may be prohibited by trial court from conferring with defense counsel during an overnight recess about testimony for its own sake but not about matters incidental to testimony.