Kernan v. Cuero

In Kernan v. Cuero, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari on November 6, 2017. The case involved California inmate Michael Cuero, who had been convicted of attempted murder and other offenses. Cuero sought federal habeas corpus relief, arguing that his state court conviction violated due process because the criminal complaint was defective. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit sided with Cuero, granting habeas relief and effectively overturning the conviction. California corrections secretary Scott Kernan petitioned the Supreme Court to intervene, asserting that the Ninth Circuit failed to properly apply the highly deferential standard required by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). Although the Court declined to take the case, Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a statement criticizing the Ninth Circuit for ignoring the legal principle that federal courts must afford broad deference to state court decisions.

The United States Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari. Justice Sotomayor issued an opinion respecting the denial, strongly suggesting that while she agreed with the denial, the Ninth Circuit’s legal reasoning was flawed and circumvented the strict deference standards required under AEDPA.

The primary dispute focused on whether the Ninth Circuit violated the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) by failing to give proper deference to the state court’s determination that a defect in the criminal charging document did not require overturning the conviction.

The case highlighted the ongoing tension between federal appellate courts and the Supreme Court regarding the strictness of the AEDPA deference standard. Justice Sotomayor’s critical statement served as a warning to circuit courts against substituting their own interpretations for reasonable state court rulings, reinforcing the narrow path for federal habeas relief.