Go to:	Briefs Menu	Cases Pending	Cases Decided

LEE v. KEMNA

United States Supreme Court No. 00-6933

---

QUESTION PRESENTED: When state law provides both fair notice of the existence of a procedural rule and a reasonable opportunity to comply, is the state's default rule rendered "inadequate," for the purpose of subsequent federal habeas review, by occasional state-court cases which deny defaulted, meritless claims on the merits rather than invoking the default rule?

ORAL ARGUMENT DATE: Date not available

---

INTRODUCTION

Interest of amicus curiae
Summary of facts and case
Summary of argument

Argument - Part I

I. "Reasonable opportunity" should be adopted as the test of adequate state procedural grounds, and the prior patchwork of confusing phrases discarded

A. "An untidy area"
B. Policy reasons

Part I.C. - I.D.

C. Consistency with statute
D. Consistency with precedent

Part II

II. State cases which deny defaulted claims on the merits should not be deemed failures to enforce the rule

Conclusion