Danforth v. Minnesota (2007)
- Docket
- 06-8273
- Decided
- 2007-01-01
Summary
Question: When determining whether Supreme Court decisions on constitutional rules of criminal procedure apply retroactively, may state supreme courts use state-law retroactivity standards that are broader than the standard in Teague v. Lane ? Conclusion: In a 7-2 opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the Court held that the federal case law precedent, including Teague did not constrain the authority of state courts to give broader effect to new rules of criminal procedure than was required by the precedent. The precedent applied only to federal habeas corpus petitions and had no bearing on state post-conviction proceedings. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote a dissenting opinion in which Justice Anthony Kennedy joined.