October Term 2016 · Docket 15-8049
Can a court excuse a missed deadline based on ineffective assistance of counsel?
Duane Buck argues his lawyers failed him. The state says he missed the deadline to appeal.
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
Christina Swarns argued for Buck. She stated his lawyers introduced a biased opinion. She claimed the opinion linked his race to violence. She asked the Court to excuse the deadline.
Mr. Keller argued for the state. He defended the death sentence. He cited the specific murders committed by Buck. He argued the deadline must be enforced.
Justice Alito called the trial conduct indefensible. He noted the unusual nature of the case. He questioned the how the case got here of the appeal.
Justice Sotomayor questioned the retroactivity of recent rulings. She asked how the argument applies to this case. She highlighted the circuit split on the issue.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 20-44 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 20-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 40-48 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 40-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-48
- 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 52-30 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-20 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 32-50 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 32-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 42-4 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 42-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 6-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 6-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 8-40 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 8-40
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Duane Buck faces the death penalty. His lawyers introduced a biased expert opinion. He missed the deadline to appeal that error. He asks the Court to excuse the missed deadline. The state says the deadline stands. The Court must decide if this excuse applies.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 5, 2016.
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
Buck wants the Court to excuse his missed deadline. He argues his lawyers failed him. He wants a new chance to appeal.
The state wants the Court to uphold the deadline. It argues Buck failed to act on time. It wants the death sentence to stand.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
What each side says
Buck argues his lawyers committed ineffective assistance. He claims this failure justifies excusing the deadline. He cites recent Supreme Court guidance on this issue.
The state argues the deadline is strict. It claims Buck cannot use this excuse. It says the lower courts applied the correct standard.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if the Third Circuit test applies here. She questioned the retroactivity of recent rulings. She noted a split among the circuits.
Chief Justice Roberts asked about the tension in Buck's briefing. He noted the focus on the underlying merits. He questioned the scope of the rule being applied.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 20-44 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 20-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 40-48 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 40-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-30 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-20 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 32-50 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 32-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 42-4 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 42-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 6-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 6-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 8-40 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 8-40
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of procedural deadlines. It affects how courts handle missed appeals. It determines if ineffective counsel can excuse delays. The outcome shapes future death penalty appeals. It clarifies the balance between finality and fairness.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
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 10, lines 20-44 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 20-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 40-48 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 40-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-48
- 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 52-30 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-20 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 32-50 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 32-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 42-4 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 42-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 6-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 6-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 8-40 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 8-40
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 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-42
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.