October Term 2022 · Docket 21-846
Does Arizona's Rule 32.1 bar federal review of a death penalty jury instruction error?
the side that brought the case claims Arizona's procedural rule blocks federal review of a flawed jury instruction. The state argues the rule creates an independent bar to federal habeas relief.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official Court opinion 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
Katyal argued the jury labored under a seriously wrong idea. He stated the judge instructed jurors on parole eligibility. He claimed this contradicted prior Supreme Court precedent. He argued this error requires federal correction.
Kanefield stated the side that brought the case murdered a police officer. He described the shooting as occurring at point-blank range. He emphasized the officer was killed in the line of duty. He presented the facts of the underlying crime.
Katyal noted his friend admitted no example of hair-splitting interpretation. He claimed this was the first time this rule interpretation occurred. He argued against the state's procedural bar.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 39-53 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 39-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 37-47 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 37-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 39-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 39-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-47
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
John Cruz received a death sentence in 2005. The trial judge told jurors he could receive parole. This instruction contradicted prior Supreme Court precedent. Cruz argues this error requires federal correction. Arizona contends its state rule prevents federal courts from reviewing this claim. The dispute centers on whether state procedural rules can block federal habeas review.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 1, 2022.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 19-21
What each side wants
Cruz wants the Supreme Court to reverse the state court's procedural bar. He seeks federal review of the jury instruction error.
Arizona wants the Supreme Court to affirm the state court's decision. It seeks to uphold the procedural bar under Rule 32.1.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
What each side says
Cruz argues the state rule does not independently bar federal review. He claims the jury instruction error violates federal constitutional rights.
Arizona argues its Rule 32.1 creates an independent and adequate state ground. It contends this rule prevents federal courts from hearing the claim.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
What the justices asked
Justice Gorsuch asked if the federal district court found the argument procedurally barred. He questioned how the Court could fault Arizona for a consistently followed rule.
Justice Thomas asked how the Court gets from a state rule interpretation to a federal issue. He noted the state court simply interpreted its own rule.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 39-53 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 39-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 37-47 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 37-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 39-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 39-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-47
Why it matters
This case determines whether state procedural rules can block federal habeas review. It affects the rights of death row inmates nationwide. It clarifies the boundary between state and federal court authority. It impacts how states manage their own criminal procedures. It shapes the scope of federal oversight in capital cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
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 27-51 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 39-53 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 39-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 37-47 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 37-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 39-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 39-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-47
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Verified official opinions and orders
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 13-17
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.