Volume 565 — United States Reports

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down fourteen per curiam opinions during its 2011 term, which began October 3, 2011 and concluded September 30, 2012.

Decided November 7, 2011 Respondents, who lost money on investments in certain limited partner ships known as the Rye Funds (Funds), sued… Held: By disregarding the direct-derivative status of two of respondents’ claims, the Florida Court of Appeal failed to give proper effect to the plain meaning of the Federal Arbitration Act and to this Court’s holding in Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd, 470 U. S. 213, that the Act “leaves no place for the exercise of discretion . . .…

Decided November 7, 2011 Respondent Archie Dixon and an accomplice, Tim Hoffner, murdered Chris Hammer in order to steal his car. Held: The Sixth Circuit lacked the authority to overturn the Ohio Supreme Court’s reasoned judgment, which did not rest on errors “well under stood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fair- minded disagreement,” Harrington v. Richter, 562 U. S. 86, 103. The 24 BOBBY v. DIXON

Greene v. Fisher, 565 U.S. 34 (2011), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), which sets the standard of review for habeas corpus petitions brought in federal court to challenge state court convictions.

Judulang v. Holder, 565 U.S. 42 (2011), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving deportation law and procedure. The case involved a rule adopted by the Board of Immigration Appeals for determining the eligibility of certain long-term resident aliens, when they are facing deportation because of a prior criminal conviction, to apply to the Attorney General for relief. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Elena Kagan, the Court invalidated the BIA's "comparable-grounds rule" as arbitrary and capricious, holding that it had no rational relation to the merits of an alien's claim for remaining in the United States, nor to the policy and purposes of the immigration laws.

Decided December 12, 2011 After a mistrial, Illinois decided to retry respondent Cross for several counts of sexual assault, but the victim, who had testified at respond ent’s first trial despite her… Held: The Seventh Circuit departed from the “ ‘highly deferential standard for evaluating state-court rulings,’ ” Felkner v. Jackson, 562 U. S. 594, 598, imposed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

Smith v. Cain, 565 U.S. 73 (2012), is a United States Supreme Court decision in which the court held that a witness's statements are "plainly material" under Brady v. Maryland when they are the only evidence linking the defendant to the crime. Therefore, the prosecution was required to turn over the information during discovery.

CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood, 565 U.S. 95 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that because the Credit Repair Organizations Act is silent on whether claims can proceed in an arbitrable forum, the Federal Arbitration Act requires the arbitration agreement to be enforced according to its terms.

Minneci v. Pollard, 565 U.S. 118 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that, when state tort law authorizes adequate alternative damages actions—providing both significant deterrence and compensation—no Bivens remedy can be implied.

Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Section 2253(c)(3) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 is a mandatory but nonjurisdictional rule. A certificate of appealability's failure to "indicate" a constitutional issue does not deprive a Court of Appeals of jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. For a person incarcerated by a state who does not seek review in that state's highest court, the judgment becomes "final" for purposes of AEDPA's Section 2244(d)(1)(A) on the date that the time for seeking such review expires.

Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 565 U.S. 171 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously ruled that federal discrimination laws do not apply to religious organizations' selection of religious leaders.

Pacific Operators Offshore, LLP v. Valladolid, 565 U.S. 207 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act extends coverage for injury occurring as the result of operations conducted on the Outer Continental Shelf to an employee who can establish a substantial nexus between his injury and his employer's extractive operations on the Shelf.

Perry v. New Hampshire, 565 U.S. 228 (2012), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of eyewitness identifications.

Maples v. Thomas, 565 U.S. 266 (2012), is a United States Supreme Court ruling in which the Court ruled 7–2 that Cory R. Maples, who had been convicted of murdering two people and faced a possible death sentence, should get another opportunity in court because his lawyers at Sullivan & Cromwell had abandoned him.

Golan v. Holder, 565 U.S. 302 (2012), was a US Supreme Court case that dealt with copyright and the public domain. It held that the "limited time" language of the United States Constitution's Copyright Clause does not preclude the extension of copyright protections to works previously in the public domain.

Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, 565 U.S. 368 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that federal and state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over private suits arising under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.

After the 2010 census, Texas redrew its electoral districts to comply with the Constitution’s one-person, one-vote rule. Held: Because it is unclear whether the District Court in Texas followed the appropriate standards in drawing interim maps, the orders imple menting those maps are vacated.

United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that installing a Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking device on a vehicle and using the device to monitor the vehicle's movements constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.

Reynolds v. United States 565 U.S. 432 (2012) is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Pre-SORNA sex offenders are not obligated to register unless the Attorney General specifies applicability.

National Meat Association v. Harris, 565 U.S. 452 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Federal Meat Inspection Act preempts a California statute relating to non-ambulatory animals.

Decided January 23, 2012 While investigating a letter threatening a school shooting, Police Sergeant Ryburn and Officer Zepeda, petitioners, sought to question Vincent Huff, the student rumored… Held: Petitioners are entitled to qualified immunity. A reasonable officer could have read this Court’s cases to mean that the Fourth Amendment permits an officer to enter a residence if the officer has a reasonable basis for concluding that there is an imminent threat of violence.

Kawashima v. Holder, 565 U.S. 478 (2012), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206 qualifies as an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act when the Government's revenue loss exceeds $10,000."

Howes v. Fields, 565 U.S. 499 (2012), was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that an interrogation of a prisoner was not a custodial interrogation per se, and certainly it was not "clearly established federal law" that it was custodial, as would be required by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). Instead, the Court said, whether the interrogation was custodial depended on the specific circumstances, and moreover, in the particular circumstances of this case, it was not custodial (that is, he was not "in custody" in a way that was covered by the Miranda v. Arizona decision). This decision overturned the rule of the Sixth Circuit, and denied the prisoner's habeas corpus petition.

Decided February 24, 2012 Respondent James Lambert was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of two patrons during a robbery of… Held: The Third Circuit failed to follow the requirements of the Antiter rorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which precludes a fed eral court from granting habeas relief to a state prisoner unless the state court’s adjudication of his claim involved an unreasonable applica tion of federal law, 28 U. S. C. § 2254(d)(1).

Decided February 21, 2012* Respondents Brown, Taylor, and Marchio each filed negligence suits against West Virginia nursing homes in state court. Held: The FAA pre-empts West Virginia’s public policy categorically pro hibiting the enforcement of all predispute arbitration agreements that apply to personal-injury or wrongful-death claims against nursing homes.

Messerschmidt v. Millender, 565 U.S. 535 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that state officers are entitled to qualified immunity after seizing unrelated evidence from someone who was not under investigation when the error was not immediately apparent based on the text of the search warrant.

PPL Montana, LLC v. Montana, 565 U.S. 576 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the equal-footing doctrine gives a state title to a segment of a river if that segment was navigable at the time the state enters the union; else, it remained in control of the federal government and could be sold by the government.

Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California, 565 U.S. 606 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court declined to make a firm decision. The plaintiffs in the case asserted that the Supremacy Clause gave them a private right to sue for the enforcement of the federal Medicaid law when a state Medicaid law conflicted with it. Due to changed circumstances while the appeal was ongoing, the court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for consideration of whether a private Supremacy Clause challenge can be made when agency litigation is possible.

Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp., 565 U.S. 625 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the state-law design-defect and failure-to-warn claims of this case fell within the field of locomotive equipment regulation preempted by the Locomotive Inspection Act, as that field was defined in Napier v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co..

Martel v. Clair, 565 U.S. 648 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that when evaluating motions to substitute counsel in capital cases, courts should employ the same "interests of justice" standard that applies in non-capital cases.