In the Supremes

SCOTUSBlog notes the following criminal law cases to be argued at the Supreme Court on 4 October

Howes v. Fields, “Custody” under Miranda.

Issue: Whether this Court’s clearly established precedent under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 holds that a prisoner is always “in custody” for purposes of Miranda any time that prisoner is isolated from the general prison population and questioned about conduct occurring outside the prison regardless of the surrounding circumstances. Plain English Issue: Suspects are entitled to Miranda warnings when questioned about a crime while they are “in custody.” Is a prisoner is always “in custody,” so that Mirandawarnings are required, whenever he is isolated from the general prison population and questioned about conduct occurring outside the prison.

Perhaps some value for those of us who have pending cases out of the USDB.

Martinez v. Ryan, Ineffective assistance of counsel.

Issue: Whether a defendant in a state criminal case who is prohibited by state law from raising on direct appeal any claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, but who has a state-law right to raise such a claim in a first post-conviction proceeding, has a federal constitutional right to effective assistance of first post-conviction counsel specifically with respect to his ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim Plain English Issue: Ordinarily, criminal defendants have a constitutional right to have a lawyer appointed to represent them at their trial and during their direct appeal, but not during any subsequent post-conviction proceedings. When a state system only allows prisoners to argue that their lawyers were inadequate during post-conviction proceedings, does the defendant have a right to appointed counsel during that proceeding?