Wainwright v. Sykes
| Wainwright v. Sykes | |
|---|---|
| Argued March 29, 1977 Decided June 23, 1977 | |
| Full case name | Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation, Petitioner, v. John Sykes |
| Citations | 433 U.S. 72 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 528 F.2d 522 (CA5 1976) |
| Subsequent | Rehearing denied, 434 U.S. 880, 98 S.Ct. 241. |
| Holding | |
| Respondent's failure to make timely objection under the Florida contemporaneous objection rule to the admission of his inculpatory statements, absent a showing of cause for the noncompliance and some showing of actual prejudice, bars federal habeas corpus review of his Miranda claim. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens |
| Concurrence | Burger |
| Concurrence | Stevens |
| Concurrence | White (in judgment) |
| Dissent | Brennan, joined by Marshall |
Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case decided on June 23, 1977. In a 7–2 decision by Associate Justice William Rehnquist, the Court held that, if a state prisoner fails to raise a federal constitutional claim at trial or on appeal in a manner in keeping with the state's requirements, and cause and prejudice for this failure cannot be shown, that claim cannot be subsequently raised in federal habeas corpus proceedings. The majority adopted the "cause" and "prejudice" requirement that had been laid out in the 1976 Supreme Court decision, Francis v. Henderson, rejecting the broader standard the Court had outlined in the 1963 case Fay v. Noia. Sykes has since been recognized as one of multiple Supreme Court cases that limited the scope of its prior decision in Fay v. Noia, which the Court eventually overruled completely in the 1991 case Coleman v. Thompson. However, Sykes did not completely overrule Fay, though some scholars have argued that Sykes narrowed the scope of Fay so much as to effectively overrule it.