Buck v. Davis
- Decided
- February 22, 2017
- Docket
- 15–8049.
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,697 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- concluding that the petitioner was “entitle[d] to relief under Rule 60(b)(6)” because of a change in law and intervening devel- opments of fact — Kemp v. United States (2022)
- holding that the 3 process of resolving whether a petitioner is entitled to a COA should not devolve into a determination of the merits — Ritterbush v. Benzon (2019)
- holding that trial counsel’s introduction of expert testimony using race as predictive factor in determining future dangerousness constituted ineffective assistance of counsel — ACOSTA, HECTOR v. the State of Texas (2024)
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
Chief Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.
A Texas jury convicted petitioner Duane Buck of capital murder. Under state law, the jury could impose a death sentence only if it found that Buck was likely to commit acts of violence in the future. Buck's attorney called a psychologist to offer his opinion on that issue. The psychologist testified that Buck probably would not engage in violent conduct. But he also stated that one of the factors pertinent in assessing a person's propensity for violence was his race, and that Buck was statistically more likely to act violently because he is black. The jury sentenced Buck to death.
Buck contends that his attorney's introduction of this evidence violated his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel. This claim has never been heard on the merits in any court, because the attorney who represented Buck in his first state postconviction proceeding failed to raise it. In 2006, a Federal District Court relied on that failure-properly, under then-governing law-to hold that Buck's claim was procedurally defaulted and unreviewable.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100 (2017)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.