Reply Brief in Cone v. Bell
on May 23, 2008 at 10:25 am
Yesterday, Akin Gump and the Stanford Clinic filed this reply brief in the case of Cone v. Bell.Â The issue is whether a federal habeas claim is â€œprocedurally defaultedâ€ because it has been presented twice to the state courts, and whether a federal habeas court is powerless to recognize that a state court erred in holding that state law precludes reviewing a claim.
The cert. petition can be found here, the brief in opposition here, and the opinion below of the Sixth Circuit is here.Â Additionally, cert. stage amicus briefs in support of petitioner can be found here on behalf of Veterans for America and here on behalf of Former Prosecutors.
The case is scheduled to be considered at the Conference of June 5.