Teague v. Lane
- Decided
- April 17, 1989
- Docket
- 87-5259
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 6,602 timesOverruled in part (verified)Overruled in part by Edwards v. Vannoy, No. 19-5807 (U.S. May 17, 2021) (2021) (verified: Constitution Annotated, Library of Congress) · Edwards v. Vannoy
What later courts said
- holding that a new rule of constitutional criminal procedure is not applicable to cases that became final before the new rule was announced — Ronald Dale Yeatts v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections (1999)
- holding that new rules of constitutional criminal law will not be announced or applied on collateral review — Gerald Wayne Tigner v. Janie Cockrell, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division (2001)
- holding that a “new rule” does not retroactively apply to cases on collateral review unless it falls within one of a narrowly-defined set of exceptions — United States v. Kurt Donald Cousins, and Bukola Tolase-Cousins (2006)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Justice O’Connor announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, and III, and an opinion with respect to Parts IV and V, in which The Chief Justice, Justice Scalia, and Justice Kennedy join.
In Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U. S. 522 (1975), this Court held that the Sixth Amendment required that the jury venire be drawn from a fair cross section of the community. The Court stated, however, that “in holding that petit juries must be drawn from a source fairly representative of the community we impose no requirement that petit juries actually chosen must mirror the community and reflect the various distinctive groups in the population. Defendants are not entitled to a jury of any particular composition.” Id., at 538. The principal question presented in this case is whether the Sixth Amendment’s fair cross section requirement should now be extended to the petit jury. Because we adopt Justice Harlan’s approach to retroactivity for cases on collateral review, we leave the resolution of that question for another dav.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.