On Point blog, page 1 of 25
SCOTUS applies emergency aid exception to warrant requirement “without further gloss;” declines to adopt probable cause standard
Case v. Montana, USSC No. 24-624, 1/14/2026, affirming Montana v. Case, 2024 MT 165, 417 Mont. 354, 553 P.3d 985; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS unanimously holds that Brigham City v. Stuart‘s objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render aid applies “without further gloss” and was satisfied here. While SCOTUS affirms the Montana Supreme Court’s judgment, the Court does not adopt the lower court’s reasoning in full.
SCOTUS reverses COA order granting habeas relief because it relied on ground not raised by parties.
Terrence Clark v. Jeremiah Antoine Sweeney, USSC No. 25-52, 11/24/2025; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS reverses Fourth Circuit’s order granting habeas relief because the court relied on ground that was not presented by the parties.
SCOTUS: Mississippi statute mandating screening child witness from defendant violates right to confrontation.
Jeffrey Clyde Pitts v. Mississippi, USSC No. 24-1159, 11/24/2025; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS reverses conviction for child abuse because Mississippi law that requires screening at trial for child witnesses conflicted with the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee to face-to-face confrontation.
SCOTUS: Second habeas petition filed while first petition pending on appeal must clear procedural hurdle before claim may be considered on its merits.
Rivers v. Guerrero, USSC No. 23-1345, 6/12/2025; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
A unanimous SCOTUS held that a habeas petitioner’s second filing asserting a new claim for relief, submitted after the district court entered judgment with respect to the first filing but while the first filing was pending on appeal, qualifies as a “second or successive” petition and must be approved by the court of appeals before considered by the district court.
SCOTUS Wrap-up
In addition to the SCOTUS cases to which we devoted individual posts (Smith v. Arizona, Erlinger v. U.S., U.S. v. Rahimi, Garland v. Cargill), below is a summary of criminal or criminal-adjacent cases decided by SCOTUS in the 2023-24 term that we consider of interest to criminal practice in Wisconsin state courts.
SCOTUS addresses half of the Confrontation Clause analysis on substitute expert testimony; holds such testimony is generally hearsay
Smith v. Arizona, USSC No. 22-899, 6/21/2024, vacating and remanding Arizona v. Smith, No. 1CA-CR 21-0451 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022) (unreported); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS unanimously holds that expert witness testimony restating an absent lab analyst’s factual assertions to support his or her own opinion is hearsay. However, the Court declined to address the second part of the Confrontation Clause test, whether the underlying evidence was testimonial, as the issue was undeveloped in this case.
SCOTUS requires jury to find whether prior offenses occurred on different occasions to enhance sentence under Armed Career Criminal Act
Erlinger v. United States, USSC No. 23-370, June 21, 2024, vacating United States v. Erlinger, 77 F.4th 617 (7th Cir. 2023); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
Whether offenses committed on three “occasions different from one another” for purposes of federal Armed Career Criminal Act must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
SCOTUS tempers pro-gun 2nd Amendment precedent; holds States may disarm a citizen who poses “a clear threat of physical violence to another”
United States of America v. Rahimi, USSC No. 22-915, 6/21/2024, reversing United States v. Rahimi, 61 F.4th 443 (5th Cir. 2023); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
In a much-anticipated Second Amendment decision, SCOTUS tries to clarify its turbulent precedent regarding firearm restrictions and offers a limited holding upholding a federal statute disarming persons subject to domestic abuse restraining orders so long as specific statutory elements are met.
SCOTUS: ATF exceeded statutory authority by defining “machinegun” to include bump stocks.
Garland v. Cargill, USSC No. 22-976, June 14, 2024, affirming Cargill v. Garland , 57 F.4th 447 (5th Cir. 2023) (en banc); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
ATF exceeded authority when it defined “machinegun” to include bump stocks.
SCOTUS limits practical effect of Bruton’s rule against using the confession of a non-testifying co-defendant
Samia v. United States, USSC No. 22-196, 143 S. Ct. 2004, June 23, 2023, affirming U.S. v. Hunter, et al., Nos. 18-3074-cr, 18-3489-cr, 19-790-cr (2nd Cir. Apr. 20, 2022) (not reported); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
A majority of the Supreme Court affirms the use of a confession of one non-testifying co-defendant against another defendant, and its rationale shows, in the words of the dissenters, that the majority thinks the rule in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (1968), “should go.” (Kagan dissent at 10; Jackson dissent at 1).