« Justice Gorsuch, standing, and the end of the Establishment Clause | Main | Pozen on video review and soccer »

Thursday, June 20, 2019

McDonough and accrual of due process claims

SCOTUS on Thursday held in McDonough v. Smith that a due process claim for fabrication of evidence can be brought only after the underlying criminal proceeding was favorably terminated. Thus a claim brought within three years of acquittal, but more than three years after the introduction of the fabricated evidence. My SCOTUSBlog analysis is here.

The line-up is interesting: Thomas wrote for Kagan and Gorsuch that the Court should have DIG'd the case, because uncertainty about the plaintiff's precise claim made it impossible to determine accrual, so this was the wrong vehicle for deciding the limitations questions.

Posted by Howard Wasserman on June 20, 2019 at 04:12 PM | Permalink

Comments

"Interesting, really bizarre to claim that the constitutional right violated here, is not so clear,"

It is astonishing to me that Kagan joined the dissent but then wrote Grundy. So let us be clear. She is willing to read the tea leaves of a *statute* in order to find its hidden meaning but she is not willing to read the tea leaves of a *brief* to discern its hidden meaning.

OOOOOOkay.....that, that is her great rational mind at work /s

Posted by: James | Jun 21, 2019 10:00:48 AM

Interesting, really bizarre to claim that the constitutional right violated here, is not so clear. Countless violations in fact. But as suggested by me at the time, the best way to solve it, is to have secondary or independent trial, before any trial, to conclude or prevail concerning the fabricated evidences. Having done that, all options are available, and the period of time until expiration and limitation, can safely start to kick ( for you won't have to wait for results of the criminal trial ). Because whatever, even if the defendant is convicted finally, the issue of the fabricated evidences stands on its own ( although one may claim that as such other evidences may or should be suppressed). In that way, you wouldn't need to mess even,criminal and civil suits.But, that needs certain legislation or regulation.

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Jun 20, 2019 7:40:21 PM

Post a comment