CREATORS
October 7, 2025
The U.S.
Supreme Court's new term begins this week. There are 10 cases scheduled for
argument during the "October Sitting" of the Court. Five of those
cases are focused on criminal law.
According
to Rory Little, writing at the SCOTUSblog, the Court's oral arguments for
October focus on constitutional criminal law. Those cases include the Fourth
Amendment's protection from unreasonable searches, the Sixth Amendment's right
to counsel and the Eighth Amendment's treatment of the death penalty.
The first
case argued before the nine justices this term was the case of David
Villarreal. He was on trial for murder in Texas in 2018. Villarreal engaged in
a drug-fueled argument with his roommate. Their argument turned physical —
Villarreal said his roommate was strangling him and he feared for his life — he
fatally stabbed his roommate.
Villarreal
took the stand as the only defense witness, but the judge had a scheduling
conflict that arose during Villarreal's testimony. So, in the middle of
Villarreal's direct examination, the judge declared a 24-hour recess and
instructed Villarreal and his attorneys not to talk about his testimony during
the recess.
The Sixth
Amendment guarantees that people accused of crimes shall "have the
assistance of counsel for his defense" in criminal prosecutions. Nearly a
half-century ago, the Court ruled that any limitation on a defendant conferring
with their attorney during an overnight recess violated the Sixth Amendment's
right to counsel.
Later, the
high Court limited defense counsel's opportunity to discuss testimony with a
defendant during a short recess.
During
Villarreal's argument on day one of the term, Madiba K. Dennie at the blog
"Balls and Strikes" reported an unlikely alliance between Justice
Clarence Thomas and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
"In
the judge's instructions, he said: 'I don't want you discussing what you
couldn't discuss with him if he was on the stand in front of the jury,'"
Justice Thomas asked Villarreal's lawyer, "What's wrong with that?"
Justice
Jackson said Thomas was making "a critical point." If a lawyer can't
prep the witness while they're on the stand, Jackson asked, "Why should he
be allowed to do so during an overnight recess?" Jackson also emphasized
that the trial court wasn't making a big imposition: Under this rule, a
defendant could still talk to their lawyer, but not about their testimony — in
Jackson's words, "just eliminating that very narrow category of
conduct."
The Fourth
Amendment will be tested later in the term. William Trevor Case's ex-girlfriend
told the police that Case was threatening suicide. The police spoke with Case
for about 40 minutes outside his home. Officers then entered his home without a
warrant.
The entry
is the issue before the Court. The case sought to suppress the evidence
collected during the "illegal" entry. The motion was denied, and he
was convicted. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed his conviction.
In 2006,
the Supreme Court found that an "objectively reasonable basis" is
required for warrantless "emergency aid" home entries. Little, asks
at SCOTUSblog, does an "objectively reasonable basis" mean the same
level of suspicion as "probable cause" that is required to get a
search warrant? Or is some lesser degree of suspicion, say "reasonable
suspicion," used to make an investigatory detention, sufficient for an
emergency warrantless entry?
Finally,
on November 4, the Court will be asked to specify more clearly how lower courts
should analyze whether a capital defendant is so intellectually disabled that
they may not be executed. In 2002, the high Court in Atkins v. Virginia held
that the intellectually disabled could not be executed. But the Court never
defined intellectual disability. The Court will decide this specific question
during the new term — "Whether and how courts may consider the cumulative
effect of multiple IQ scores in assessing an Atkins claim."
This will
be an interesting term - if the high Court can pull itself away from President
Donald Trump's ever-increasing emergency petitions.
Matthew T.
Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book
The Executioner's Toll, 2010, was released by McFarland Publishing. You can
reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter @MatthewTMangino
To visit Creators CLICK HERE
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment