...
By Jenna Sundel
News Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from a historic ruling on Tuesday in the case of an Oklahoma woman on death row for murder.
The Supreme Court overturned the court of appeals' opinion in the case, which found that there was no legal precedent addressing whether prejudicial evidence violates due process.
In a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, Thomas said the lower court followed the precedent set by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996.
Read More on U.S.
Why It Matters
Thomas warns that the Court's decision could lead to the misapplication of AEDPA.
"We have instructed lower courts to avoid framing our precedents at too high a level of generality," Thomas said.
What To Know
The Supreme Court's decision marks the first time it has overturned a lower court's ruling for failing to find that a legal rule is clearly established under AEDPA, according to Thomas.
...
Who Is Brenda Andrew?
Brenda Andrew was convicted of capital murder in 2001 killing of her husband, Robert Andrew. Brenda told police that she was separated from her husband and dating James Pavatt.
Pavatt later confessed to committing the shooting with a friend. He said Brenda was not involved, but they were both charged with capital murder.
Brenda appealed her conviction, arguing that "irrelevant evidence," including that she had dressed provocatively at a restaurant and "had extramarital sexual affairs with two other men," violated Oklahoma law and the Federal Due Process Clause.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA) found that the admission of evidence was proper. A federal district court denied relief and a divided circuit court found that Andrew had failed to cite "clearly established federal law governing her claim."
"That was wrong," the Supreme Court said, pointing to the legal precedent established by Payne v. Tennessee.
The Court said that case established a precedent that when "evidence is introduced that is so unduly prejudicial that it renders the trial fundamentally unfair, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides a mechanism for relief."
Does Oklahoma Still Have The Death Penalty?
The death penalty is a legal punishment in Oklahoma. The state has the highest number of executions per capita in the United States.
As of last month, 32 inmates were on death row in Oklahoma. Andrew is the only woman on death row in the state.
What Are The 27 States That Have The Death Penalty?
The death penalty is still permitted under law in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.
Governors have placed a hold on executions in California, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Oregon.
What People Are Saying
The Supreme Court, in its ruling: "At the time of the OCCA's decision, clearly established law provided that the Due Process Clause forbids the introduction of evidence so unduly prejudicial as to render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair."
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, in his dissent: "However, the Court turns this approach on its head, steamrolling settled AEDPA principles to set aside an entirely correct Tenth Circuit decision. I respectfully dissent."
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court vacated the lower court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Do you have a story Newsweek should be covering? Do you have any questions about this story? Contact LiveNews@newsweek.com.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines