Murray v. Carrier

Supreme Court of the United States · 1986 · Federal Courts

Federal CourtsHabeas CorpusProcedural DefaultCause and Prejudicefederal habeasprocedural defaultcauseprejudice

Facts

Respondent was convicted in Virginia of rape and abduction. His trial counsel sought discovery of the victim's statements to police, but the trial judge denied access after in camera review, concluding the statements contained no exculpatory evidence. Counsel listed the denial of discovery in the notice of appeal but omitted it from the petition for appeal, even though Virginia rules allowed review only of errors assigned in the petition. Respondent later pursued habeas relief claiming due process was violated by withholding the statements, but the State argued the claim was procedurally defaulted because it had not been properly raised on direct appeal.

Issue

Can a federal habeas petitioner establish cause for a state procedural default by showing only that competent counsel inadvertently or ignorantly failed to raise a claim, rather than deliberately withholding it? Does a different rule apply when the procedural default occurred on appeal rather than at trial?

Rule

Attorney error short of constitutionally ineffective assistance does not constitute cause for a procedural default. Cause ordinarily requires a showing that some objective factor external to the defense impeded counsel's efforts to comply with the State's procedural rule, such as the unavailability of the factual or legal basis of a claim or interference by officials; ineffective assistance may constitute cause, but generally must first be presented to the state courts as an independent claim. In an extraordinary case, a federal habeas court may grant relief despite the absence of cause where a constitutional violation probably resulted in the conviction of one who is actually innocent.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Ohio, Devin Mercer was convicted of robbery. On direct appeal, his lawyer filed a brief raising three claims but accidentally omitted a preserved due process claim because she misread her notes; Devin later sought federal habeas relief and expressly disclaimed any ineffective-assistance argument.

Can Devin show cause for the state appellate default?

Explanation. Cause ordinarily requires an objective factor external to the defense that impeded compliance with the state rule. The majority held that attorney error short of constitutionally ineffective assistance does not constitute cause, and that this applies to defaults on appeal as well as at trial. Because Devin alleges only counsel's inadvertence and no external impediment or ineffective assistance claim, he cannot establish cause.