October Term 2014 · Docket 13-1433
Does AEDPA deference apply to state court fact-finding on intellectual disability?
Brumfield argues the state court unreasonably denied his disability claim. The state defends its factual findings under federal deference rules.
Verified source milestones
- — 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.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Ms. Burns argued the state court's conclusion was unreasonable. She claimed it lacked viable support in the record.
Mr. DeSanctis argued the state court unreasonably denied a hearing. He claimed the court misjudged Brumfield's mental condition.
Chief Justice Roberts questioned the relevance of state evidence. He asked how state facts pertain to federal questions.
Justice Kennedy asked if state misinterpretation of federal rules creates violations. He probed the effect of low state standards.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-30 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 36-38 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 36-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 48-48 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 48-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-6 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 16-26 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 16-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 30-38 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 30-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 46-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 46-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-14 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 20-26 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 20-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 38-48 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 38-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 28-48 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 28-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 14-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 14-18
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Brumfield seeks a hearing on his intellectual disability claim. The state court denied this request. Brumfield argues the denial was unreasonable. The state argues its findings deserve federal deference.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 30, 2015.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
What each side wants
Brumfield wants the Court to reject the state court's factual findings. He argues they were unreasonable under federal law.
The state wants the Court to uphold the state court's decision. It argues the findings deserve AEDPA deference.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
What each side says
Brumfield argues the state court's factual conclusion was unreasonable. He claims this violates federal habeas standards.
The state argues its court's findings were reasonable. It claims AEDPA requires deference to state fact-finding.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked if state law thresholds change the federal burden. He questioned the relevance of state evidence to federal questions.
Justice Kennedy asked if misinterpreting federal rules creates a violation. He questioned the impact of low state standards on federal claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-30 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 36-38 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 36-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 48-48 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 48-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-6 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 16-26 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 16-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 30-38 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 30-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 46-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 46-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-14 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 20-26 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 20-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 38-48 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 38-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 28-48 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 28-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 14-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 14-18
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of federal review over state court fact-finding. It determines how strictly courts must examine state determinations of intellectual disability. The outcome shapes the balance between federal rights and state judicial authority.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
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 Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-30 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 36-38 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 36-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 48-48 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 48-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-6 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 16-26 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 16-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 30-38 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 30-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 46-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 46-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-14 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 20-26 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 20-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 38-48 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 38-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 28-48 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 28-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 14-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 14-18
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 44-18 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 44-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-20
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.