By: Derek Hawkins//July 5, 2017//
United States Supreme Court
Case Name: DAVILA v. DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
Case No.: 16-6219
Focus: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
The ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel does not pro- vide cause to excuse the procedural default of ineffective-assistance- of-appellate-counsel claims.
In Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U. S. 722, this Court held that attorney error committed in the course of state postconviction proceedings—for which the Constitution does not guarantee the right to counsel—cannot supply cause to excuse a procedural default that occurs in those proceedings. Id., at 755. In Martinez, the Court announced an “equitable . . . qualification” of Coleman’s rule that applies where state law requires a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel to be raised in an “initial-review collateral proceeding,” rather than on direct appeal. 566 U. S., at 16, 17. In those situations, “a procedural default will not bar a federal habeas court from hearing a substantial claim of ineffective assistance at trial if” the default results from the ineffective assistance of the prisoner’s counsel in the collateral proceeding. Id., at 17. The Court clarified in Trevino that Martinez’s exception also applies where the State’s “procedural framework, by reason of its design and operation, makes it unlikely in a typical case that a defendant will have a meaningful opportunity to raise” the claim on direct appeal. 569 U. S., at ___.
Affirmed
Dissenting: Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan
Concurring: