Supreme Court· 2/19/1991

Ford v. Georgia

Citations

498 U.S. 411
111 S. Ct. 850
112 L. Ed. 2d 935
1991 U.S. LEXIS 660

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that a state procedural rule not yet established at the time of petitioner’s trial and which expressly applied only prospectively was inadequate to preclude Supreme Court review
holding state law must be “firmly established and regularly followed” for purposes of procedural default
explaining that Batson “left it to the trial courts, with their wide ‘variety of jury selection practices,’ to implement Batson in the first instance” (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 99 n.24)
state procedural rule must be “firmly established and regularly followed” to bar federal habeas review
procedural rule must be firmly established at the time in question to bar federal habeas review
rule of state procedure that disposes of a constitutional claim must be firmly established and regularly followed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: SouteR, Souter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

467 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Ford v. Georgia

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.