{"id":11556,"date":"2025-07-02T11:08:33","date_gmt":"2025-07-02T18:08:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556"},"modified":"2025-07-02T11:11:13","modified_gmt":"2025-07-02T18:11:13","slug":"brief-summaries-of-supreme-court-criminal-and-related-decisions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556","title":{"rendered":"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here are brief summaries of the holdings in the criminal and related cases for the U.S. Supreme Court term just ended, October 2024 to June 2025. The summaries are taken from the Supreme Court\u2019s website<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Hamm v. Smith<\/em>, No. 23-167, decided November 4, 2024. Opinion Per Curiam<\/em>
\nThe judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Eleventh Circuit to clarify the basis for its decision affirming the District Court\u2019s judgment that Smith is ineligible for the death penalty due to intellectual disability.<\/p>\n

Andrew v. White<\/em>, No. 23-6573, decided January 21, 2025. Opinion Per Curiam<\/em>
\nAt the time of the decision of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, clearly established federal law provided that the erroneous admission of unduly prejudicial evidence could render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair in violation of due process, see Payne v. Tennessee<\/em>, 501 U. S. 808, 825 (1991); the judgment below is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings.<\/p>\n

Williams v. Reed<\/em>, No. 23-191, decided February 21, 2025. Opinion by Justice Kavanaugh
\nWhere a state court\u2019s application of a state exhaustion requirement in effect immunizes state officials from 42 U. S. C. \u00a71983 claims challenging delays in the administrative process, state courts may not deny those claims on failure-to-exhaust grounds.<\/p>\n

Glossip v. Oklahoma<\/em>, No. 22-7466, decided February 25, 2025. Opinion by Justice Sotomayor
\nThe Court has jurisdiction to review the judgment of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals; the prosecution violated its constitutional obligation to correct false testimony under Napue v. Illinois, 360 U. S. 264.<\/p>\n

Thompson v. United States<\/em>, No. 23-1095, decided March 21, 2025. Opinion by Chief Justice Roberts
\nTitle 18 U. S. C. \u00a71014, which prohibits \u201cknowingly mak[ing] any false statement,\u201d does not criminalize statements that are misleading but not false.<\/p>\n

Delligatti v. United States<\/em>, No. 23-825, decided March 21, 2025. Opinion by Justice Thomas
\nThe knowing or intentional causation of injury or death, whether by act or omission, necessarily involves the \u201cuse\u201d of \u201cphysical force\u201d against another person within the meaning of 18 U. S. C. \u00a7924(c)(3)(A).<\/p>\n

Barnes v. Felix<\/em>, No. 23-1239, decided May 15, 2025. Opinion by Justice Kagan
\nThe Fifth Circuit\u2019s moment-of-threat rule\u2014a framework for evaluating police shootings which requires a court to look only to the circumstances existing at the precise time an officer perceived the threat inducing him to shoot\u2014improperly narrows the Fourth Amendment analysis of police use of force.<\/p>\n

Kousisis v. United States<\/em>, No. 23-909, decided May 22, 2025. Opinion by Justice Barrett
\nA defendant who induces a victim to enter into a transaction under materially false pretenses may be convicted of federal fraud even if the defendant did not seek to cause the victim economic loss.<\/p>\n

Martin v. United States<\/em>, No. 24-362, decided June 12, 2025. Opinion by Justice Gorsuch
\nThe Supremacy Clause does not afford the United States a defense in a suit against it under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U. S. C. \u00a72671 et seq., and the law enforcement proviso in \u00a72680(h) of the FTCA overrides only the intentional-tort exception in that subsection, not the discretionary-function exception or other exceptions throughout \u00a72680.<\/p>\n

Rivers v. Guerrero<\/em>, No. 23-1345, decided June 12, 2025. Opinion by Justice Jackson
\nOnce a district court enters its judgment with respect to a first-filed habeas petition, see 28 U. S. C. \u00a72254, a second-in-time filing qualifies as a \u201csecond or successive application\u201d under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 properly subject to the requirements of \u00a72244(b).<\/p>\n

Perttu v. Richards<\/em>, No. 23-1324, decided June 18, 2025. Opinion by Chief Justice Roberts
\nParties are entitled to a jury trial on the issue of exhaustion of remedies under The Prison Litigation Reform Act when that issue is intertwined with the merits of a claim that requires a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.<\/p>\n

Esteras v. United States<\/em>, No. 23-7483, decided June 20, 2025. Opinion by Justice Barrett
\nA district court considering whether to revoke a defendant\u2019s term of supervised release may not consider 18 U. S. C. \u00a73553(a)(2)(A), which covers retribution vis-\u00e0-vis the defendant\u2019s underlying criminal offense.<\/p>\n

Gutierrez v. Saenz<\/em>, No. 23-7809, decided June 26, 2025. Opinion by Justice Sotomayor
\nPetitioner Ruben Gutierrez has standing to bring his 42 U. S. C. \u00a71983 claim challenging Texas\u2019s postconviction DNA testing procedures under the Due Process Clause.<\/p>\n

Hewitt v. United States<\/em>, No. 23-1002, decided June 26, 2025. Opinion by Justice Jackson
\nBecause a sentence \u201chas . . . been imposed\u201d for purposes of \u00a7403(b) of the First Step Act only if the sentence is extant (i.e., has not been vacated), the Act\u2019s more lenient penalties apply to defendants whose previous 18 U. S. C. \u00a7924(c) sentences have been vacated and who need to be resentenced following the Act\u2019s enactment; the judgment of the Fifth Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded.<\/p>\n

Goldey v. Fields<\/em>, No. 24-809, decided June 30, 2025. Opinion Per Curiam<\/em>
\nThe Fourth Circuit\u2019s determination that inmate Andrew Fields could proceed with his Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents<\/em>, 403 U. S. 388 (1971), is reversed, and the case is remanded.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here are brief summaries of the holdings in the criminal and related cases for the U.S. Supreme Court term just ended, October 2024 to June 2025. The summaries are taken from the Supreme Court\u2019s website.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[56],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11556","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-u-s-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBrief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions - Crime & Consequences<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions - Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Here are brief summaries of the holdings in the criminal and related cases for the U.S. Supreme Court term just ended, October 2024 to June 2025. The summaries are taken from the Supreme Court\u2019s website.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-07-02T18:08:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-02T18:11:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556\",\"name\":\"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions - Crime & Consequences\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-02T18:08:33+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-07-02T18:11:13+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\",\"name\":\"Crime & Consequences\",\"description\":\"Crime and criminal law\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\",\"name\":\"Kent Scheidegger\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.cjlf.org\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions - Crime & Consequences","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions - Crime & Consequences","og_description":"Here are brief summaries of the holdings in the criminal and related cases for the U.S. Supreme Court term just ended, October 2024 to June 2025. The summaries are taken from the Supreme Court\u2019s website.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556","og_site_name":"Crime & Consequences","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/","article_published_time":"2025-07-02T18:08:33+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-07-02T18:11:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Kent Scheidegger","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kent Scheidegger","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556","name":"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions - Crime & Consequences","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-07-02T18:08:33+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-02T18:11:13+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11556#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Brief Summaries of Supreme Court Criminal and Related Decisions"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/","name":"Crime & Consequences","description":"Crime and criminal law","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356","name":"Kent Scheidegger","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.cjlf.org"],"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11556","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11556"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11556\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11560,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11556\/revisions\/11560"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11556"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11556"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11556"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}