United States Supreme Court

Opinions Filed in October 2011

Vogt v. City of Hays

Whether a criminal defendant's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is violated if the government uses compelled statements against the criminal defendant during a probable cause hearing.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Cavazos v. Smith

HABEAS CORPUS (Certiorari granted and the judgment of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cavazos v. Smith is reversed)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Lafler v. Cooper

Whether a defendant is entitled to federal habeas relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel when counsel provided objectively unreasonable advice that caused the defendant to reject a plea deal, and, if so, whether the appropriate remedy is a court order that the State either offer specific performance of the rejected deal or release the defendant from custody.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Post-Conviction Relief

Missouri v. Frye

Whether trial counsel’s failure to disclose an offer made during plea negotiations to his client amounts to ineffective assistance of counsel when the defendant later pled guilty and was sentenced to less favorable terms.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Post-Conviction Relief

Elgin v. Department of the Treasury

Whether the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) prevents Federal District Courts from having jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to employment dismissals under the Military Selective Services Act (MSSA).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Kobel v. Dutch Petroleum

(1) Whether the question of corporate civil tort liability under the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”), 28 U.S.C. §1350, is a question of merits or one of subject matter jurisdiction; and (2) whether a corporation may be held liable for a tort committed in violation of the law of nations, such as torture or genocide, under the ATS like any other private party defendant or whether they are immune from such liability.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Corporations

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington

(Whether the Fourth Amendment permits a jail to conduct a strip search of individual's arrested for civil contempt.)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Judulang v. Holder

(Whether a lawful permanent resident convicted of an offense that renders him deportable and excludeable under different statutory subsections, but did not depart or reenter the United States after conviction, is categorically foreclosed from seeking discretionary relief under former Section § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationalty Act)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood

(Whether the Credit Repair Organization Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1679 creates a non-waivable right that prevents the enforcement of an arbitration clause.)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

Greene v. Fisher

Whether a Supreme Court decision announced after a state intermediate court's decision, but before a state supreme court’s denial of discretionary review qualifies as “clearly established Federal law” under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Pacific Operators Offshore v. Valladolid

(Whether an offshore oil worker injured at an onshore processing site falls under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act.)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law

Golan v. Holder

Whether the Copyright Clause and the First Amendment prohibit Congress from removing works that were previously placed in the public domain.

Area(s) of Law:
  • First Amendment

Hosanna-Tabor Church v. EEOC

Whether the ministerial exception to employment law litigation applies to an employee of a religious organization whose job duties include secular and religious activities.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Howes v. Fields

Whether police are required to issue Miranda warnings to an incarcerated prisoner during a criminal investigation of an unrelated offense.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Maples v. Thomas

Whether there is “cause” to excuse a procedural default where petitioner is blameless for the default, the state's own conduct contributed to the default, and petitioner's attorneys of record were no longer functioning as his agents at the time of any default.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Martinez v. Ryan

Whether a state criminal defendant has a federal constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel on the first post-conviction relief (PCR) appeal that regards an ineffective assistance of counsel claim when state law prohibits raising a direct appeal for ineffective assistance of trial counsel but has a state-law right to raise such a claim in a first post-conviction proceeding.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Douglas v. Indep. Living Center Of S. Ca; Douglas v. Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital

Whether Medicaid recipients and providers maintain a cause of action under the Supremacy Clause to enforce certain provisions of the Medicaid Act.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Preemption

Reynolds v. United States

Whether standing may be established under plain reading of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) to challenge an interim rule applying the statute retroactively to parties who committed the offense prior to the statute’s enactment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Standing

Setser v. United States

Whether a federal district court properly ordered a federal sentence to run consecutively to a not-yet-imposed state sentence.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Back to Top