Lacy v. City & County of S.F.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that state procedural rules generally will be “adequate” when they are reasonable and clearly stated
• finding that the Mississippi rule requiring contemporaneous objection to the introduction of illegal evidence serves a legitimate state interest by giving the court the opportunity to conduct the trial without using tainted evidence
• stating that “deliberate bypassing by counsel of the contemporaneous-objection rule [to illegally seized evidence] as a part of trial strategy” was not an exceptional circumstance requiring prior con sultation with the defendant
• noting that the contemporaneous objection rule works to “immediately appris[e] the trial judge of the objection, . . . giv[ing] the court the opportunity to conduct the trial without using the tainted evidence”
• showing of legitimate state interest required for non-compliance with state procedural rule to bar direct review by Supreme Court
• noting that if supported by sound tactical reasons, “counsel’s deliberate choice of the strategy [to delay objection] would amount to a waiver binding on petitioner and would preclude him from a decision on the merits of his federal claim either in the state courts or here”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).