October Term 2006 · Docket 06-413

Does a state court's factual finding survive federal review if it seems unreasonable?

the sides that brought the case seek to keep a state court's factual finding. the opposing sides want a federal court to overturn that finding.

Official caption
Uttecht v. Brown
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the sides that brought the case argue the state court's finding was not objectively unreasonable.

    the opposing sides argue the state court's finding was objectively unreasonable.

    questions

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the standard for federal habeas review of state court facts.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 17, 2007.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the federal court to uphold the state court's factual finding.

the opposing sides want the federal court to overturn the state court's factual finding.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue the state court's finding was not objectively unreasonable.

the opposing sides argue the state court's finding was objectively unreasonable.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Roberts asked how a defense failure to object affects the analysis.

Justice Kennedy asked when a specific juror was considered during voir dire.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This dispute defines the limits of federal power to correct state court errors. It shapes how often federal courts intervene in state criminal cases. It affects the finality of state court judgments.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON