Harris v. Reed

Summary

The Court held that Michigan v. Long’s plain-statement rule applies to federal habeas review: an ambiguous state-court reference to procedural default does not bar review unless the last state court rendering judgment clearly and expressly relied on that default. Because the Illinois Appellate Court did not clearly invoke waiver as a ground for rejecting Harris’s ineffective-assistance claim, the Court reversed and remanded. Justice Stevens concurred, explaining that his objections to Long did not apply to collateral review protecting federal rights. Justice O’Connor, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Scalia, concurred to emphasize that the decision preserved exhaustion inquiries and the narrow factual-innocence exception to the cause-and-prejudice requirement. Justice Kennedy dissented, rejecting the extension of Long and favoring a narrower remand addressing the preserved alibi-witness claim and possible cause and prejudice.