Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Allen Lee Davis v. Louie L. Wainwright
Citation: 478 U.S. 1044Docket: A-224
Court: Supreme Court of the United States; September 23, 1986; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court
The Supreme Court granted a temporary stay of execution for Allen Lee Davis and Kenneth Wayne Hardwick, who were scheduled to be executed on September 23, 1986, pending their petitions for writs of certiorari regarding claims of discriminatory application of capital punishment in Florida based on the victim's race. Both men had filed habeas corpus petitions with the Florida Supreme Court on September 22, which were denied without a detailed opinion at that time. The State opposed the stay, arguing that the men were barred under state law from raising their claims in the Florida Supreme Court, asserting that Davis did not raise his claim on direct appeal, and Hardwick filed in the wrong forum, as his claim should have been filed in a trial court. Despite these procedural arguments and a prior denial of Davis's federal habeas petition for alleged abuse of the writ, the Court allowed the stay, noting that the Florida Supreme Court had not issued a definitive opinion on the procedural bars. The case raises issues similar to those in Hitchcock v. Wainwright and is set for oral argument on October 15, 1986. Justice Powell expressed hesitation in assuming the Florida Supreme Court's decisions were based on procedural grounds not evident in their orders. No explanation has been provided by Davis or Hardwick for the delay of over a month before asserting claims, particularly just before the execution date. The Florida Bar has indicated that counsel has been available since 1984 for capital cases, raising questions about whether Davis and Hardwick were unaware of this availability or when counsel were engaged. Counsel are expected to explain this inaction, as it complicates the courts' ability to make informed decisions in capital cases. Moving forward, there is an expectation that counsel will provide appropriate justifications for any late filings, particularly those submitted on the eve of execution dates. Deliberate or unjustified delays will be reported to the Florida Bar's Committee. Additionally, it is emphasized that counsel should act promptly to pursue post-conviction remedies after conviction and the exhaustion of appeals, regardless of execution date settings. Justices Rehnquist and O'Connor would deny the applications for a stay in this context.